Search (169 results, page 1 of 9)

  • × theme_ss:"OPAC"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Golderman, G.M.; Connolly, B.: Between the book covers : going beyond OPAC keyword searching with the deep linking capabilities of Google Scholar and Google Book Search (2004/05) 0.02
    0.02192564 = product of:
      0.054814097 = sum of:
        0.0076151006 = weight(_text_:a in 731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0076151006 = score(doc=731,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 731, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=731)
        0.047198996 = sum of:
          0.015787644 = weight(_text_:information in 731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.015787644 = score(doc=731,freq=8.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 731, product of:
                2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                  8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=731)
          0.031411353 = weight(_text_:22 in 731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.031411353 = score(doc=731,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 731, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=731)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    One finding of the 2006 OCLC study of College Students' Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources was that students expressed equal levels of trust in libraries and search engines when it came to meeting their information needs in a way that they felt was authoritative. Seeking to incorporate this insight into our own instructional methodology, Schaffer Library at Union College has attempted to engineer a shift from Google to Google Scholar among our student users by representing Scholar as a viable adjunct to the catalog and to snore traditional electronic resources. By attempting to engage student researchers on their own terms, we have discovered that most of them react enthusiastically to the revelation that the Google they think they know so well is, it turns out, a multifaceted resource that is capable of delivering the sort of scholarly information that will meet with their professors' approval. Specifically, this article focuses on the fact that many Google Scholar searches link hack to our own Web catalog where they identify useful book titles that direct OPAC keyword searches have missed.
    Date
    2.12.2007 19:39:22
    Footnote
    Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Profiles in digital information"
    Type
    a
  2. Lam, V.-T.: Enhancing subject access to monographs in Online Public Access Catalogs : table of contents added to bibliographic records (2000) 0.02
    0.021178266 = product of:
      0.052945666 = sum of:
        0.005779455 = weight(_text_:a in 1187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005779455 = score(doc=1187,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 1187, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1187)
        0.04716621 = sum of:
          0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 1187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.009472587 = score(doc=1187,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1187, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1187)
          0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 1187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037693623 = score(doc=1187,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1187, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1187)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Subject access to monographs through online public access catalogs (OPACs) has always been a major concern for large research and/or academic libraries. Academic library practice of providing subject access to monographs has proven inadequate, especially in the case of composite works. Many techniques have been proposed to enhance subject treatment of monographs in OPACs. This article briefly reviews these efforts in the past and presents the case of adding Tables of Contents as one of the Most useful and probably also one of the Most costeffective ways of improving subject access to Monographs in an academic environment.
    Date
    22. 9.1997 19:16:05
    Imprint
    Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
    Type
    a
  3. Rädler, K.: Kataloganreicherung mit digitalen Inhaltsverzeichnissen eröffnet neue Geschäftsfelder : Erfahrungen aus der Vorarlberger Landesbibliothek (2008) 0.02
    0.018956447 = product of:
      0.047391117 = sum of:
        0.0048162127 = weight(_text_:a in 1942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0048162127 = score(doc=1942,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 1942, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1942)
        0.042574905 = sum of:
          0.011163551 = weight(_text_:information in 1942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.011163551 = score(doc=1942,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 1942, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1942)
          0.031411353 = weight(_text_:22 in 1942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.031411353 = score(doc=1942,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1942, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1942)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Vom verflixten siebten Jahr kann man in Bregenz bisher nicht sprechen, im Gegenteil: Die Vorarlberger Landesbibliothek (VLB) hat kurz vor Ostern 2008 ihr 100.000. Inhaltsverzeichnis mit intelligentCAPTURE gescannt. Damit ist der Katalogeintrag von etwa 70 Prozent des betroffenen Freihandbestandes und sämtlicher Neuzugänge ab 2002 zusätzlich mit dem Inhaltsverzeichnis und zum Teil mit der Abbildung des Buchdeckels versehen. Die derzeitige Durchsatzrate beträgt pro Jahr 30.000 bibliographische Einheiten bei einem Personaleinsatz von 40 Stunden pro Woche. Die vollständige Erschließung des Buchbestandes in der Freihandaufstellung ist in Reichweite; ganz ohne Fördermittel im laufenden Betrieb; eine schlanke Lösung sowohl organisatorisch als auch finanziell. Da im Rahmen der Zusammenarbeit mit dandelon.com inzwischen weitere Bibliotheken in einem elegant gelösten Arbeitsablauf kooperativ erschließen, können wir bei Neuerscheinungen bereits die Hälfte als Fremddaten übernehmen. Die VLB hat mit der Digitalisierung, OCR-Konvertierung und maschinellen Indexierung von Inhaltsverzeichnissen und dem mehrsprachigen, semantischen Retrieval in der Suchmaschine dandelon.com zusammen mit der Firma AGI. Information Management Consultants Impulse im Bibliothekswesen gesetzt. Wer 2002 noch bezweifelte, dass dieser Ansatz erfolgreich sein wurde, wurde inzwischen eines Besseren belehrt. Zu offensichtlich ist der Mehrwert, den allein die Moglichkeit der entscheidend verbesserten Relevanzbeurteilung uber den OPAC bietet (http://vlb-katalog.vorarlberg.de). Er erfordert von einer zeitgemasen Bibliothek geradezu das Angebot solcher Zusatzinformationen. Aber die Anreicherung mit den Angaben aus den Inhaltsverzeichnissen bieten weit mehr, denn es entsteht durch die maschinelle Indexierung eine vollig neue Dimension an Retrievalmoglichkeiten. Die vollständige Erfassung unseres Bestandes war immer erklärtes Ziel unseres Projektes, weil wir gesehen haben, dass wir den Nutzern dadurch einen erheblichen Zusatznutzen bieten können, der in einem unbeschreiblich günstigen Verhältnis zum personellen und finanziellen Einsatz steht. Damit, dass wir dieses Ziel so schnell erreichen könnten, hatten wir nicht gerechnet.
    Date
    22. 6.2008 17:14:24
    Location
    A
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 59(2008) H.4, S.241-242
    Type
    a
  4. Saving the time of the library user through subject access innovation : Papers in honor of Pauline Atherton Cochrane (2000) 0.02
    0.01845725 = product of:
      0.046143126 = sum of:
        0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 1429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009535614 = score(doc=1429,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 1429, product of:
              5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                32.0 = termFreq=32.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1429)
        0.03660751 = sum of:
          0.014619565 = weight(_text_:information in 1429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.014619565 = score(doc=1429,freq=14.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.1796046 = fieldWeight in 1429, product of:
                3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                  14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1429)
          0.021987949 = weight(_text_:22 in 1429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.021987949 = score(doc=1429,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 1429, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1429)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Pauline Atherton Cochrane has been contributing to library and information science for fifty years. Think of it-from mid-century to the millennium, from ENIAC (practically) to Internet 11 (almost here). What a time to be in our field! Her work an indexing, subject access, and the user-oriented approach had immediate and sustained impact, and she continues to be one of our most heavily cited authors (see, JASIS, 49[4], 327-55) and most beloved personages. This introduction includes a few words about my own experiences with Pauline as well as a short summary of the contributions that make up this tribute. A review of the curriculum vita provided at the end of this publication Shows that Pauline Cochrane has been involved in a wide variety of work. As Marcia Bates points out in her note (See below), Pauline was (and is) a role model, but I will always think of her as simply the best teacher 1 ever had. In 1997, I entered the University of Illinois Graduate School of Library and Information Science as a returning mid-life student; my previous doctorate had not led to a full-time job and I was re-tooling. I was not sure what 1 would find in library school, and the introductory course attended by more than 100 students from widely varied backgrounds had not yet convinced me I was in the right place. Then, one day, Pauline gave a guest lecture an the digital library in my introductory class. I still remember it. She put up some notes-a few words clustered an the blackboard with some circles and directional arrows-and then she gave a free, seemingly extemporaneous, but riveting narrative. She set out a vision for ideal information exchange in the digital environment but noted a host of practical concerns, issues, and potential problems that required (demanded!) continued human intervention. The lecture brought that class and the entire semester's work into focus; it created tremendous excitement for the future of librarianship. 1 saw that librarians and libraries would play an active role. I was in the right place.
    Content
    Enthält Beiträge von: FUGMANN, R.: Obstacles to progress in mechanized subject access and the necessity of a paradigm change; TELL, B.: On MARC and natural text searching: a review of Pauline Cochrane's inspirational thinking grafted onto a Swedish spy on library matters; KING, D.W.: Blazing new trails: in celebration of an audacious career; FIDEL, R.: The user-centered approach; SMITH, L.: Subject access in interdisciplinary research; DRABENSTOTT, K.M.: Web search strategies; LAM, V.-T.: Enhancing subject access to monographs in Online Public Access Catalogs: table of contents added to bibliographic records; JOHNSON, E.H.: Objects for distributed heterogeneous information retrieval
    Date
    22. 9.1997 19:16:05
    Footnote
    Rez. in: KO 28(2001) no.2, S.97-100 (S. Betrand-Gastaldy); Information processing and management 37(2001) no.5, S.766-767 (H. Borko); JASIST 23(2002) no.1, S.58-60 (A.T.D. Petrou); Library and information science research 23(2001) S.200-202 (D.J. Karpuk)
    Imprint
    Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
  5. Blosser, J.; Michaelson, R.; Routh. R.; Xia, P.: Defining the landscape of Web resources : Concluding Report of the BAER Web Resources Sub-Group (2000) 0.02
    0.01551153 = product of:
      0.038778827 = sum of:
        0.0047189053 = weight(_text_:a in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0047189053 = score(doc=1447,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.088261776 = fieldWeight in 1447, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1447)
        0.034059923 = sum of:
          0.0089308405 = weight(_text_:information in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0089308405 = score(doc=1447,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 1447, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1447)
          0.025129084 = weight(_text_:22 in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.025129084 = score(doc=1447,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1447, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1447)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The BAER Web Resources Group was charged in October 1999 with defining and describing the parameters of electronic resources that do not clearly belong to the categories being defined by the BAER Digital Group or the BAER Electronic Journals Group. After some difficulty identifying precisely which resources fell under the Group's charge, we finally named the following types of resources for our consideration: web sites, electronic texts, indexes, databases and abstracts, online reference resources, and networked and non-networked CD-ROMs. Electronic resources are a vast and growing collection that touch nearly every department within the Library. It is unrealistic to think one department can effectively administer all aspects of the collection. The Group then began to focus on the concern of bibliographic access to these varied resources, and to define parameters for handling or processing them within the Library. Some key elements became evident as the work progressed. * Selection process of resources to be acquired for the collection * Duplication of effort * Use of CORC * Resource Finder design * Maintenance of Resource Finder * CD-ROMs not networked * Communications * Voyager search limitations. An unexpected collaboration with the Web Development Committee on the Resource Finder helped to steer the Group to more detailed descriptions of bibliographic access. This collaboration included development of data elements for the Resource Finder database, and some discussions on Library staff processing of the resources. The Web Resources Group invited expert testimony to help the Group broaden its view to envision public use of the resources and discuss concerns related to technical services processing. The first testimony came from members of the Resource Finder Committee. Some background information on the Web Development Resource Finder Committee was shared. The second testimony was from librarians who select electronic texts. Three main themes were addressed: accessing CD-ROMs; the issue of including non-networked CD-ROMs in the Resource Finder; and, some special concerns about electronic texts. The third testimony came from librarians who select indexes and abstracts and also provide Reference services. Appendices to this report include minutes of the meetings with the experts (Appendix A), a list of proposed data elements to be used in the Resource Finder (Appendix B), and recommendations made to the Resource Finder Committee (Appendix C). Below are summaries of the key elements.
    Date
    21. 4.2002 10:22:31
    Theme
    Information Gateway
  6. Thomas, D.H.: ¬The effect of interface design on item selection in an online catalog (2001) 0.02
    0.015460955 = product of:
      0.038652387 = sum of:
        0.0072082467 = weight(_text_:a in 168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0072082467 = score(doc=168,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13482209 = fieldWeight in 168, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=168)
        0.03144414 = sum of:
          0.006315058 = weight(_text_:information in 168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.006315058 = score(doc=168,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 168, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=168)
          0.025129084 = weight(_text_:22 in 168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.025129084 = score(doc=168,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 168, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=168)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The effect that content and layout of bibliographic displays had on the ability of end-users to process catalog information was tested using a 2 x 2 factorial experimental design. Participants were asked to perform two related tasks during the course of the experiment. In the first task, they were asked to select a set of items that they would examine further for a hypothetical paper they must write, using a simulated online catalog to make their assessments of relevance. In the second task, they were asked to examine 20 bibliographic records, decide whether they would choose to examine these items further on the shelf, and identify the data elements that they used to formulate their relevance decision. One group viewed bibliographic records on an interface similar to current online catalogs, one that used data labels and contained data elements commonly found. A second group viewed these records on an interface in which the labels had been removed, but the data elements were the same as those in the first. The third group viewed these records on a labeled display that included enhanced data elements on the brief record display. The final group viewed these records with the same brief record data elements as the third group, but with the labels removed, using ISBD and AACR2 punctuation standards. For the first task, participants using enhanced brief screen interfaces viewed more brief screens and fewer full screens than their counterparts. Screen durations for the second 10 screens were found to have dropped from those of the first 10 screens. Statistical analyses comparing demographic variables to the screen frequencies uncovered many significant differences. Participants using the enhanced-content interfaces made fewer selections from index and full screens, and more selections from brief screens. For the second task, participants who used enhanced-content interfaces were able to make some sort of relevance judgment more frequently than those who used standard-content interfaces.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Type
    a
  7. Moulaison, H.L.: OPAC queries at a medium-sized academic library : a transaction log analysis (2008) 0.01
    0.013840953 = product of:
      0.03460238 = sum of:
        0.012614433 = weight(_text_:a in 3599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012614433 = score(doc=3599,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.23593865 = fieldWeight in 3599, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3599)
        0.021987949 = product of:
          0.043975897 = sum of:
            0.043975897 = weight(_text_:22 in 3599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043975897 = score(doc=3599,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3599, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3599)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Patron queries at a four-year comprehensive college's online public access catalog were examined via transaction logs from March 2007. Three representative days were isolated for a more detailed examination of search characteristics. The results show that library users employed an average of one to three terms in a search, did not use Boolean operators, and made use of limits one-tenth of the time. Failed queries remained problematic, as a full one-third of searches resulted in zero hits. Implications and recommendations for improvements in the online public access catalog are discussed.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Type
    a
  8. Schneider, R.: OPACs, Benutzer und das Web (2009) 0.01
    0.012231203 = product of:
      0.030578006 = sum of:
        0.005448922 = weight(_text_:a in 2905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005448922 = score(doc=2905,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 2905, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2905)
        0.025129084 = product of:
          0.050258167 = sum of:
            0.050258167 = weight(_text_:22 in 2905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.050258167 = score(doc=2905,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2905, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2905)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Date
    22. 2.2009 18:50:43
    Type
    a
  9. Beccaria, M.; Scott, D.: Fac-Back-OPAC : an open source interface to your library system (2007) 0.01
    0.012098414 = product of:
      0.030246034 = sum of:
        0.008258085 = weight(_text_:a in 2207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008258085 = score(doc=2207,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 2207, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2207)
        0.021987949 = product of:
          0.043975897 = sum of:
            0.043975897 = weight(_text_:22 in 2207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043975897 = score(doc=2207,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2207, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2207)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Fac-Back-OPAC is a faceted back­ up OPAC. This advanced catalog offers features that compare favorably with the traditional catalogs for today's library systems. Fac-Back-OPAC represents the convergence of two prominent trends in library tools: the decoupling of discovery tools from the traditional integrated library system and the use of readily available open source components to rapidly produce leading-edge technology for meeting patron and library needs. Built on code that was originally developed by Casey Durfee in February 2007, Fac-Back-OPAC is available for no cost under an open source license to any library that wants to offer an advanced search interface or a backup catalog for its patrons.
    Date
    17. 8.2008 11:22:47
    Type
    a
  10. Horn, M.E.: "Garbage" in, "refuse and refuse disposal" out : making the most of the subject authority file in the OPAC (2002) 0.01
    0.011492259 = product of:
      0.028730646 = sum of:
        0.0067426977 = weight(_text_:a in 156) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067426977 = score(doc=156,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 156, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=156)
        0.021987949 = product of:
          0.043975897 = sum of:
            0.043975897 = weight(_text_:22 in 156) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043975897 = score(doc=156,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 156, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=156)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Subject access in the OPAC, as discussed in this article, is predicated on two different kinds of searching: subject (authority, alphabetic, or controlled vocabulary searching) or keyword (uncontrolled, free text, natural language vocabulary). The literature has focused on demonstrating that both approaches are needed, but very few authors address the need to integrate keyword into authority searching. The article discusses this difference and compares, with a query on the term garbage, search results in two online catalogs, one that performs keyword searches through the authority file and one where only bibliographic records are included in keyword searches.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Type
    a
  11. Li, Y.-O.; Leung, S.W.: Computer cataloging of electronic Journals in unstable Aggregator Databases the Hong Kong Baptist University Library experience (2001) 0.01
    0.010370068 = product of:
      0.02592517 = sum of:
        0.007078358 = weight(_text_:a in 164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007078358 = score(doc=164,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 164, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=164)
        0.018846812 = product of:
          0.037693623 = sum of:
            0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037693623 = score(doc=164,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 164, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=164)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The growth and use of aggregator databases have presented libraries with both new opportunities for collection enhancement and new challenges of bibliographic control. How to integrate full-text electronic journal titles in unstable aggregator databases into a library's OPAC (Online Public Access Catalog) has been an especially taxing matter for libraries. This article describes the Hong Kong Baptist University Library's effort to integrate full-text electronic journal titles from three large, unstable aggregator databases into its INNOPAC-based OPAC. The library's electronic journal computer program (EJCOP) does this in a simple, direct, consistent, and accurate manner and addresses some of the issues elaborated in the January 2000 Final Report of the Task Group on Journals in Aggregator Databases of the Standing Committee on Automation of the Library of Congress Program for Cooperative Cataloging.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Type
    a
  12. Khoo, C.S.G.; Wan, K.-W.: ¬A simple relevancy-ranking strategy for an interface to Boolean OPACs (2004) 0.01
    0.008870189 = product of:
      0.022175472 = sum of:
        0.011181499 = weight(_text_:a in 2509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011181499 = score(doc=2509,freq=44.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.20913726 = fieldWeight in 2509, product of:
              6.6332498 = tf(freq=44.0), with freq of:
                44.0 = termFreq=44.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2509)
        0.010993974 = product of:
          0.021987949 = sum of:
            0.021987949 = weight(_text_:22 in 2509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021987949 = score(doc=2509,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2509, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2509)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    A relevancy-ranking algorithm for a natural language interface to Boolean online public access catalogs (OPACs) was formulated and compared with that currently used in a knowledge-based search interface called the E-Referencer, being developed by the authors. The algorithm makes use of seven weIl-known ranking criteria: breadth of match, section weighting, proximity of query words, variant word forms (stemming), document frequency, term frequency and document length. The algorithm converts a natural language query into a series of increasingly broader Boolean search statements. In a small experiment with ten subjects in which the algorithm was simulated by hand, the algorithm obtained good results with a mean overall precision of 0.42 and mean average precision of 0.62, representing a 27 percent improvement in precision and 41 percent improvement in average precision compared to the E-Referencer. The usefulness of each step in the algorithm was analyzed and suggestions are made for improving the algorithm.
    Content
    "Most Web search engines accept natural language queries, perform some kind of fuzzy matching and produce ranked output, displaying first the documents that are most likely to be relevant. On the other hand, most library online public access catalogs (OPACs) an the Web are still Boolean retrieval systems that perform exact matching, and require users to express their search requests precisely in a Boolean search language and to refine their search statements to improve the search results. It is well-documented that users have difficulty searching Boolean OPACs effectively (e.g. Borgman, 1996; Ensor, 1992; Wallace, 1993). One approach to making OPACs easier to use is to develop a natural language search interface that acts as a middleware between the user's Web browser and the OPAC system. The search interface can accept a natural language query from the user and reformulate it as a series of Boolean search statements that are then submitted to the OPAC. The records retrieved by the OPAC are ranked by the search interface before forwarding them to the user's Web browser. The user, then, does not need to interact directly with the Boolean OPAC but with the natural language search interface or search intermediary. The search interface interacts with the OPAC system an the user's behalf. The advantage of this approach is that no modification to the OPAC or library system is required. Furthermore, the search interface can access multiple OPACs, acting as a meta search engine, and integrate search results from various OPACs before sending them to the user. The search interface needs to incorporate a method for converting the user's natural language query into a series of Boolean search statements, and for ranking the OPAC records retrieved. The purpose of this study was to develop a relevancyranking algorithm for a search interface to Boolean OPAC systems. This is part of an on-going effort to develop a knowledge-based search interface to OPACs called the E-Referencer (Khoo et al., 1998, 1999; Poo et al., 2000). E-Referencer v. 2 that has been implemented applies a repertoire of initial search strategies and reformulation strategies to retrieve records from OPACs using the Z39.50 protocol, and also assists users in mapping query keywords to the Library of Congress subject headings."
    Source
    Electronic library. 22(2004) no.2, S.112-120
    Type
    a
  13. De Rosa, C.; Cantrell, J.; Cellentani, D.; Hawk, J.; Jenkins, L.; Wilson, A.: Perceptions of libraries and information resources : A Report to the OCLC Membership (2005) 0.01
    0.008627858 = product of:
      0.021569645 = sum of:
        0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 5018) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008173384 = score(doc=5018,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 5018, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5018)
        0.013396261 = product of:
          0.026792523 = sum of:
            0.026792523 = weight(_text_:information in 5018) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026792523 = score(doc=5018,freq=16.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.3291521 = fieldWeight in 5018, product of:
                  4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                    16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5018)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Summarizes findings of an international study on information-seeking habits and preferences: With extensive input from hundreds of librarians and OCLC staff, the OCLC Market Research team developed a project and commissioned Harris Interactive Inc. to survey a representative sample of information consumers. In June of 2005, we collected over 3,300 responses from information consumers in Australia, Canada, India, Singapore, the United Kingdom and the United States. The Perceptions report provides the findings and responses from the online survey in an effort to learn more about: * Library use * Awareness and use of library electronic resources * Free vs. for-fee information * The "Library" brand The findings indicate that information consumers view libraries as places to borrow print books, but they are unaware of the rich electronic content they can access through libraries. Even though information consumers make limited use of these resources, they continue to trust libraries as reliable sources of information.
  14. Robertson, S.E.; Walker, S.; Beaulieu, M.: Experimentation as a way of life : Okapi at TREC (2000) 0.01
    0.008412599 = product of:
      0.021031497 = sum of:
        0.01155891 = weight(_text_:a in 6030) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01155891 = score(doc=6030,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 6030, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6030)
        0.009472587 = product of:
          0.018945174 = sum of:
            0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 6030) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018945174 = score(doc=6030,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 6030, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6030)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Source
    Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.1, S.95-108
    Type
    a
  15. Spalding, T.: Breaking into the OPAC (2009) 0.01
    0.008234787 = product of:
      0.020586967 = sum of:
        0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 2777) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009535614 = score(doc=2777,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 2777, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2777)
        0.011051352 = product of:
          0.022102704 = sum of:
            0.022102704 = weight(_text_:information in 2777) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022102704 = score(doc=2777,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 2777, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2777)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Imprint
    Medford, N.J. : Information Today
    Type
    a
  16. Furner, J.: On Recommending (2002) 0.01
    0.0079049645 = product of:
      0.019762412 = sum of:
        0.01155891 = weight(_text_:a in 5243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01155891 = score(doc=5243,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 5243, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5243)
        0.008203502 = product of:
          0.016407004 = sum of:
            0.016407004 = weight(_text_:information in 5243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.016407004 = score(doc=5243,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 5243, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5243)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    By "recommending'' Furner refers to collaborative filtering where multiple user rankings of items are used to create a single new ranking for a user, or to a system itself generating rankings of items for its users. This would include document retrieval systems as a subset recommending systems in the second instance, but in the first would make document retrieval system and recommending system synonyms. Information seeking actions are classified either as evaluative (determining the worth of an item), recommending (expressing perceived worth), or informative (examining the content of an item). The task of the information retrieval system is to be to predict the particular ordering that the user would specify in a given context, given complete knowledge of the collection. Citations may be considered as the result of evaluative and recommending decisions by the author, and assigned index terms may be considered as the same sort of decisions by the indexer. The selection of relevant documents by a searcher from a list also involves evaluative and recommending decisions. This suggests that searchers should have the opportunity to bring multiple ranking techniques to bear.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 53(2002) no.9, S.747-763
    Type
    a
  17. Weaver, M.: Contextual metadata: faceted schemas in virtual library communities (2007) 0.01
    0.0072525083 = product of:
      0.018131271 = sum of:
        0.01129502 = weight(_text_:a in 2598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01129502 = score(doc=2598,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.21126054 = fieldWeight in 2598, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2598)
        0.006836252 = product of:
          0.013672504 = sum of:
            0.013672504 = weight(_text_:information in 2598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.013672504 = score(doc=2598,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 2598, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2598)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore the information needs of one user group, public library fiction readers, in order to reveal a design of an online community at the local level. Examination of user-generated metadata can reveal new approaches to information architecture. Design/methodology/approach - A literature review into behaviors of virtual communities; surveying public library readers regarding search behavior characteristics - the survey included a sample "tagging" exercise to determine whether public library communities could create meaningful metadata for retrieval purposes. Findings - The use of relevance as an indicator of tag quality is flawed: in a survey, public library readers "tagged" the novel The Da Vinci Code. The resulting collection of tags provided a richer description of the book than did the social book-related web site www.librarything.com. Tag collections can be broken down into different categories, each reflecting a different "facet" of the novel: character, plot, subject/topic, setting, and genre. Faceted structure to tags enables users to choose the context of the tag to the novel. Research limitations/implications - This research is relevant in the world of social networking sites, online communities, or any other such system where users generate descriptive metadata. Examination of such metadata can reveal facets, which can guide the architect/librarian in the design of a versatile architecture. Originality/value - This research resulted in a manifold design for a public-library-based online community that allowed for the full expression of users' information needs. This research introduces a faceted structure to current approaches for user-generated metadata, adding versatility to search terms.
    Type
    a
  18. Pedersen, J.O.; Silverstein, C.; Vogt, C.C.: Verity at TREC-6 : out-of-the-box and beyond (2000) 0.01
    0.007058388 = product of:
      0.01764597 = sum of:
        0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 6427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008173384 = score(doc=6427,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 6427, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6427)
        0.009472587 = product of:
          0.018945174 = sum of:
            0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 6427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018945174 = score(doc=6427,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 6427, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6427)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Source
    Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.1, S.187-196
    Type
    a
  19. Hildreth, C.R.: Accounting for users' inflated assessments of on-line catalogue search performance and usefulness : an experimental study (2001) 0.01
    0.007058388 = product of:
      0.01764597 = sum of:
        0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 4130) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008173384 = score(doc=4130,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 4130, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4130)
        0.009472587 = product of:
          0.018945174 = sum of:
            0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 4130) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018945174 = score(doc=4130,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 4130, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4130)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Source
    Information Research. 6(2001), no.2
    Type
    a
  20. Schallier, W.: On the razor's edge : between local and overall needs in knowledge organization (2004) 0.01
    0.0070448965 = product of:
      0.017612241 = sum of:
        0.010551793 = weight(_text_:a in 2665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010551793 = score(doc=2665,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.19735932 = fieldWeight in 2665, product of:
              5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                30.0 = termFreq=30.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2665)
        0.0070604496 = product of:
          0.014120899 = sum of:
            0.014120899 = weight(_text_:information in 2665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.014120899 = score(doc=2665,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.1734784 = fieldWeight in 2665, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2665)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Recent projects in subject indexing and classification at K.U.Leuven University Library (Belgium) aim to give new Impulses to knowledge organization within the Institution. While in recent years a lot of attention was given, and with good reason, to the technical and administrative integration of e-sources, less energy was invested in organising the content of traditional and electronic collections. Nevertheless, presenting information sources in a content-structured way remains a core task of our University Library. This paper focuses an some experiments with subject search interfaces at K.U.Leuven University Library and situates them in a new policy for knowledge organization, which tries to find a balance between local and overall needs.
    Content
    1. One Institution, one catalogue, one solution? K.U.Leuven University Library has a decentralised structure consisting of several department libraries and one central library. It is part of LIBIS-net, which is the biggest network of academic libraries in Belgium. In this network, maintaining the balance between local and overall needs presents a constant challenge. Standards and overall rules in cataloguing are indispensable for permitting information exchange within and outside the network. On the other hand, overall solutions do not necessarily render the best service to the user of a specific library. This is especially the case for subject cataloguing. It is difficult, and perhaps unreasonable, to convince a department library to use a generally accepted thesaurus like LCSH, if the users are familiar with a local classification that is much better adapted to the collection. The DOBIS/LIBIS library system of K.U.Leuven offered a technical solution for the conflict between overall and local needs. The main part of the bibliographic description was stored an the overall level and was visible for the whole network. For subject cataloguing this was the case for UDC, LCSH and McSH. A UDC authority file was built containing UDC codes linked to descriptors in different languages (Dutch, English and French). The authority file was linked to the UDC codes used in the bibliographic descriptions. This permitted searching by either UDC codes or verbal terms. LCSH were regularly and automatically uploaded in the catalogue to enrich the bibliographic descriptions. Finally, our Library of Biomedical Sciences used McSH. Local information, like thesauri and classifications exclusively used in a specific library, were stored in local files ("local keywords") and could only be seen by that library (up to branch level). For many years, this local information posed no difficulties. 27.04% of all documents and 38.16% of those younger than 1992 have local keywords
    Source
    Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
    Type
    a

Authors

Languages

  • e 87
  • d 76
  • a 1
  • es 1
  • i 1
  • pt 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 154
  • el 12
  • m 4
  • r 3
  • x 3
  • b 1
  • s 1
  • More… Less…