Search (1873 results, page 1 of 94)

  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  1. Morris, D.E.; Hobert, C.B.; Osmus, L.; Wool, G.: Cataloging staff costs revisited (2000) 0.12 
    0.12442586 = product of:
  0.16590114 = sum of:
    0.010295319 = weight(_text_:a in 171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010295319 = score(doc=171,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 171, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=171)
    0.12819354 = weight(_text_:70 in 171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12819354 = score(doc=171,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.4732989 = fieldWeight in 171, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=171)
    0.027412282 = product of:
      0.054824565 = sum of:
        0.054824565 = weight(_text_:22 in 171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054824565 = score(doc=171,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 171, 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=171)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Staff costs for cataloging have declined at Iowa State University Library. This is demonstrated by data from a longitudinal time and cost study begun in 1987. We discuss the national developments, technological advancements, and reengineering efforts that have supported greater cataloging effectiveness and quality. We use the ISU findings as an example of a nationwide phenomenon resulting from the remarkable ability of catalogers to share work through national bibliographic utilities.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 44(2000) no.2, S.70-83
    Type
    a
  2. Juola, P.; Mikros, G.K.; Vinsick, S.: ¬A comparative assessment of the difficulty of authorship attribution in Greek and in English (2019) 0.10 
    0.09609097 = product of:
  0.1281213 = sum of:
    0.010507616 = weight(_text_:a in 4676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010507616 = score(doc=4676,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 4676, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4676)
    0.11330816 = weight(_text_:70 in 4676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11330816 = score(doc=4676,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.4183411 = fieldWeight in 4676, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4676)
    0.0043055234 = product of:
      0.008611047 = sum of:
        0.008611047 = weight(_text_:information in 4676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008611047 = score(doc=4676,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4676, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4676)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Authorship attribution is an important problem in text classification, with many applications and a substantial body of research activity. Among the research findings are that many different methods will work, including a number of methods that are superficially language-independent (such as an analysis of the most common "words" or "character n-grams" in a document). Since all languages have words (and all written languages have characters), this method could (in theory) work on any language. However, it is not clear that the methods that work best on, for example English, would also work best on other languages. It is not even clear that the same level of performance is achievable in different languages, even under identical conditions. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to achieve "identical conditions" in practice. A new corpus, developed by George Mikros, provides very tight controls not only for author but also for topic, thus enabling a direct comparison of performance levels between the two languages Greek and English. We compare a number of different methods head-to-head on this corpus, and show that, overall, performance on English is higher than performance on Greek, often highly significantly so.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.1, S.61-70
    Type
    a
  3. Hegna, K.; Murtomaa, E.: Data mining MARC to find : FRBR? (2003) 0.08 
    0.08451671 = product of:
  0.16903342 = sum of:
    0.010402009 = weight(_text_:a in 69) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010402009 = score(doc=69,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 69, 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=69)
    0.15863141 = weight(_text_:70 in 69) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15863141 = score(doc=69,freq=1.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.5856775 = fieldWeight in 69, product of:
          1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
            1.0 = termFreq=1.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=69)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    70
    Type
    a
  4. Potha, N.; Stamatatos, E.: Improving author verification based on topic modeling (2019) 0.07 
    0.07148232 = product of:
  0.095309764 = sum of:
    0.009099863 = weight(_text_:a in 5385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009099863 = score(doc=5385,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 5385, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5385)
    0.08012097 = weight(_text_:70 in 5385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08012097 = score(doc=5385,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.29581183 = fieldWeight in 5385, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5385)
    0.0060889297 = product of:
      0.012177859 = sum of:
        0.012177859 = weight(_text_:information in 5385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012177859 = score(doc=5385,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 5385, 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=5385)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Authorship analysis attempts to reveal information about authors of digital documents enabling applications in digital humanities, text forensics, and cyber-security. Author verification is a fundamental task where, given a set of texts written by a certain author, we should decide whether another text is also by that author. In this article we systematically study the usefulness of topic modeling in author verification. We examine several author verification methods that cover the main paradigms, namely, intrinsic (attempt to solve a one-class classification task) and extrinsic (attempt to solve a binary classification task) methods as well as profile-based (all documents of known authorship are treated cumulatively) and instance-based (each document of known authorship is treated separately) approaches combined with well-known topic modeling methods such as Latent Semantic Indexing (LSI) and Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA). We use benchmark data sets and demonstrate that LDA is better combined with extrinsic methods, while the most effective intrinsic method is based on LSI. Moreover, topic modeling seems to be particularly effective for profile-based approaches and the performance is enhanced when latent topics are extracted by an enriched set of documents. The comparison to state-of-the-art methods demonstrates the great potential of the approaches presented in this study. It is also demonstrates that even when genre-agnostic external documents are used, the proposed extrinsic models are very competitive.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.10, S.1074-1088
    Type
    a
  5. Henriksen, D.: Alphabetic or contributor author order : what Is the norm in Danish economics and political science and why? (2019) 0.07 
    0.06955013 = product of:
  0.0927335 = sum of:
    0.008307 = weight(_text_:a in 4629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008307 = score(doc=4629,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 4629, 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=4629)
    0.08012097 = weight(_text_:70 in 4629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08012097 = score(doc=4629,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.29581183 = fieldWeight in 4629, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4629)
    0.0043055234 = product of:
      0.008611047 = sum of:
        0.008611047 = weight(_text_:information in 4629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008611047 = score(doc=4629,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4629, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4629)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Researchers have different ways of deciding on the author order, and how they do it often depends on the culture of their field. Some fields are well known for using alphabetic author order, while others put a great emphasis on the meaning of the author order and place authors according to contribution. This article is the first to use mixed method to examine the extent of alphabetic author order and to examine why researchers adopt a certain author order norm in the fields of economics and political science. The article finds that alphabetic authorship has been and is the norm in economics, while some tendency towards it exists in political science. The differences in the intellectual and social organization of the fields seem to be a factor in the extent that these researchers will adopt a certain norm. Furthermore, the increasing number of authors per article and the publish-or-perish culture seems to put pressure on the alphabetic norm because it creates greater attention to the reputational advantages of being first-author.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.6, S.607-618
    Type
    a
  6. Karaulova, M.; Gök, A.; Shapira, P.: Identifying author heritage using surname data : an application for Russian surnames (2019) 0.07 
    0.06955013 = product of:
  0.0927335 = sum of:
    0.008307 = weight(_text_:a in 5223) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008307 = score(doc=5223,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 5223, 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=5223)
    0.08012097 = weight(_text_:70 in 5223) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08012097 = score(doc=5223,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.29581183 = fieldWeight in 5223, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5223)
    0.0043055234 = product of:
      0.008611047 = sum of:
        0.008611047 = weight(_text_:information in 5223) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008611047 = score(doc=5223,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 5223, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5223)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    This research article puts forward a method to identify the national heritage of authors based on the morphology of their surnames. Most studies in the field use variants of dictionary-based surname methods to identify ethnic communities, an approach that suffers from methodological limitations. Using the public file of ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) identifiers in 2015, we developed a surname-based identification method and applied it to infer Russian heritage from suffix-based morphological regularities. The method was developed conceptually and tested in an undersampled control set. Identification based on surname morphology was then complemented by using first-name data to eliminate false-positive results. The method achieved 98% precision and 94% recall rates-superior to most other methods that use name data. The procedure can be adapted to identify the heritage of a variety of national groups with morphologically regular naming traditions. We elaborate on how the method can be employed to overcome long-standing limitations of using name data in bibliometric datasets. This identification method can contribute to advancing research in scientific mobility and migration, patenting by certain groups, publishing and collaboration, transnational and scientific diaspora links, and the effects of diversity on the innovative performance of organizations, regions, and countries.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.5, S.488-498
    Type
    a
  7. Lackner, M.: ¬Die Alma-Implementierung im Österreichischen Bibliothekenverbund (OBV) unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kohorte 2-Bibliotheken (2018) 0.07 
    0.068299815 = product of:
  0.13659963 = sum of:
    0.008406092 = weight(_text_:a in 4568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008406092 = score(doc=4568,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 4568, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4568)
    0.12819354 = weight(_text_:70 in 4568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12819354 = score(doc=4568,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.4732989 = fieldWeight in 4568, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4568)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Location
    A
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 70(2018) H.2, S.267-275
    Type
    a
  8. Bauer, B.; Lackner, M.; Schubert, B.: ¬Der Österreichische Bibliothekenverbund im Umbruch : neues Bibliotheksverwaltungssystem Alma als Impuls für die Zukunft (2018) 0.07 
    0.068299815 = product of:
  0.13659963 = sum of:
    0.008406092 = weight(_text_:a in 4660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008406092 = score(doc=4660,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 4660, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4660)
    0.12819354 = weight(_text_:70 in 4660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12819354 = score(doc=4660,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.4732989 = fieldWeight in 4660, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4660)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Location
    A
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 70(2018) H.2, S.260-266
    Type
    a
  9. Beiler, C.; Gratzl, P.; Schubert, B.; Steiner, C.; Steltzer, R.: Erschliessungsarbeit nn Alma : Erfahrungen aus dem OBV vor, während und nach der Aleph-Ablöse (2018) 0.07 
    0.068299815 = product of:
  0.13659963 = sum of:
    0.008406092 = weight(_text_:a in 4662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008406092 = score(doc=4662,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 4662, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4662)
    0.12819354 = weight(_text_:70 in 4662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12819354 = score(doc=4662,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.4732989 = fieldWeight in 4662, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4662)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Location
    A
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 70(2018) H.2, S.282-306
    Type
    a
  10. Kann, B.: Alma im Österreichischen Bibliothekenverbund (OBV) : aus der Werkstatt der OBVSG (2018) 0.07 
    0.068299815 = product of:
  0.13659963 = sum of:
    0.008406092 = weight(_text_:a in 4663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008406092 = score(doc=4663,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 4663, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4663)
    0.12819354 = weight(_text_:70 in 4663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12819354 = score(doc=4663,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.4732989 = fieldWeight in 4663, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4663)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Location
    A
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 70(2018) H.2, S.307-319
    Type
    a
  11. Schiller, R.: Wo gehest du hin? : zukünftige Dienstleistungen der OBVSG - Ergebnisse einer Umfrage (2018) 0.07 
    0.068299815 = product of:
  0.13659963 = sum of:
    0.008406092 = weight(_text_:a in 4664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008406092 = score(doc=4664,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 4664, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4664)
    0.12819354 = weight(_text_:70 in 4664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12819354 = score(doc=4664,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.4732989 = fieldWeight in 4664, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4664)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Location
    A
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 70(2018) H.2, S.351-355
    Type
    a
  12. Adamovic, S.; Miskovic, V.; Milosavljevic, M.; Sarac, M.; Veinovic, M.: Automated language-independent authorship verification (for Indo-European languages) : facilitating adaptive visual exploration of scientific publications by citation links (2019) 0.07 
    0.06726023 = product of:
  0.08968031 = sum of:
    0.005253808 = weight(_text_:a in 5327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005253808 = score(doc=5327,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 5327, 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=5327)
    0.08012097 = weight(_text_:70 in 5327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08012097 = score(doc=5327,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.29581183 = fieldWeight in 5327, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5327)
    0.0043055234 = product of:
      0.008611047 = sum of:
        0.008611047 = weight(_text_:information in 5327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008611047 = score(doc=5327,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 5327, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5327)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    In this article we examine automated language-independent authorship verification using text examples in several representative Indo-European languages, in cases when the examined texts belong to an open set of authors, that is, the author is unknown. We showcase the set of developed language-dependent and language-independent features, the model of training examples, consisting of pairs of equal features for known and unknown texts, and the appropriate method of authorship verification. An authorship verification accuracy greater than 90% was accomplished via the application of stylometric methods on four different languages (English, Greek, Spanish, and Dutch, while the verification for Dutch is slightly lower). For the multilingual case, the highest authorship verification accuracy using basic machine-learning methods, over 90%, was achieved by the application of the kNN and SVM-SMO methods, using the feature selection method SVM-RFE. The improvement in authorship verification accuracy in multilingual cases, over 94%, was accomplished via ensemble learning methods, with the MultiboostAB method being a bit more accurate, but Random Forest is generally more appropriate
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.8, S.858-871
    Type
    a
  13. Jeng, L.H.: ¬An expert system for determining title proper in descriptive cataloging : a conceptual model (1986) 0.06 
    0.06128568 = product of:
  0.12257136 = sum of:
    0.010402009 = weight(_text_:a in 375) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010402009 = score(doc=375,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 375, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=375)
    0.11216935 = weight(_text_:70 in 375) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11216935 = score(doc=375,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.41413653 = fieldWeight in 375, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=375)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The human process of determining bibliographic data from title pages of monographs is complex, yet systematic. This paper investigates the intellectual process involved, in conceptual and logical levels, by proposing a model of the expert system for determining title proper as the first element of the first area in ISBD. It assumes that the title page of a monograph consists of more than one block of character or graphic representation. Each block has its physical and content characteristics and can be separated from other blocks by separators. Three categories of expert knowledge are identified, and the system model is discussed along with its individual system component. It applies the "list" concept for the system data structure and addresses the potentiality of this conceptual model.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 7(1986) no.2, S.55-70
    Type
    a
  14. Lisius, P.H.: AACR2 to RDA : is knowledge of both needed during the transition period? (2015) 0.06 
    0.06128568 = product of:
  0.12257136 = sum of:
    0.010402009 = weight(_text_:a in 2008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010402009 = score(doc=2008,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 2008, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2008)
    0.11216935 = weight(_text_:70 in 2008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11216935 = score(doc=2008,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.41413653 = fieldWeight in 2008, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2008)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The cataloging community is at a crossroads. Will catalogers need to continue learning both Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules , Second Edition (AACR2) and Resource Description and Access (RDA), or will learning RDA alone be enough? Through a selective literature review and examining the RDA Toolkit, it seems that there is currently a collective need to have access to both codes. However, when considering both Library of Congress-Program for Cooperative Cataloging (LC-PCC) and OCLC initiatives and an example from this author's institution relating to authority control in RDA and bibliographic record hybridization, it may only be necessary to learn RDA in the future. Additional research into practitioner experience could be done in the future to further examine this.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.1, S.40-70
    Type
    a
  15. Lam, V.-T.: Outsourcing authority control : experience of the University of Saskatchewan Libraries (2001) 0.06 
    0.05976234 = product of:
  0.11952468 = sum of:
    0.0073553314 = weight(_text_:a in 2827) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0073553314 = score(doc=2827,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 2827, 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=2827)
    0.11216935 = weight(_text_:70 in 2827) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11216935 = score(doc=2827,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.41413653 = fieldWeight in 2827, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2827)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Authority Control (AC) is an important cataloging function aimed at achieving catalog consistency. It is very time-consuming and labor-intensive. During the 1990s, many North American academic libraries, under budgetary constraints, have tried to outsource AC activities. The Cataloging Department of the University of Saskatchewan Libraries (USL) outsourced its AC activities to the Library Technology Inc. (LTI), a United States-based AC processing vendor. This paper summarizes the experiences gained by USL in this AC project: the decision-making process in the selection of LTI; pre- and post-database clean-up by LTI; and, the current AC activities.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 32(2001) no.4, S.53-70
    Type
    a
  16. Ma, Y.-L.; Liu, W.: Digital resources and metadata application in Shanghai Library (2003) 0.06 
    0.05976234 = product of:
  0.11952468 = sum of:
    0.0073553314 = weight(_text_:a in 5506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0073553314 = score(doc=5506,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 5506, 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=5506)
    0.11216935 = weight(_text_:70 in 5506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11216935 = score(doc=5506,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.41413653 = fieldWeight in 5506, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5506)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The Shanghai Digital Library (SDL) is a component of the China Digital Library Project. This paper introduces the framework, goals, and contents of the China Digital Library Project. The vision, mission, system architecture, digital resources, and related major technology of the SDL project are discussed. Also, the background of the Chinese metadata application and the metadata scheme of the SDL are described, and the features of metadata application in practical cases are analyzed. Finally, current issues of metadata application and their solutions are suggested.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 36(2003) nos.3/4, S.57-70
    Type
    a
  17. Winke, R.C.: Discarding the main entry in an online cataloging environment (1993) 0.06 
    0.05976234 = product of:
  0.11952468 = sum of:
    0.0073553314 = weight(_text_:a in 545) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0073553314 = score(doc=545,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 545, 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=545)
    0.11216935 = weight(_text_:70 in 545) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11216935 = score(doc=545,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.41413653 = fieldWeight in 545, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=545)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The concept of the main entry has lost any meaningful purpose in today's online cataloging environment, despite a multiplicity of definitions. To bring current cataloging tools up-to-date, AACR2 chapter 21 and the MARC format need to be revised. The revision of AACR2 is based on four tenets: (1) minor and repetitive word changes to the text, (2) the removal of the concept of primary responsibility from the rules, (3) the elimination of all rules concerning corporate main entry, and (4) the integration of the added entry rules into the main portion of the text. Updating the MARC format includes the obsolescence of the IXX fields while altering the 7XX fields to indicate former main entries and from which entry the work in hand was Cuttered.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 16(1993) no.1, S.53-70
    Type
    a
  18. Bauer, B.; Hamedinger, W.: Alma im Österreichischen Bibliothekenverbund und die Perspektiven für die Österreichische Bibliothekenverbund und Service Gmbh : Wolfgang Hamedinger, Geschäftsführer der OBVSG, beantwortet 10 Fragen von Bruno Bauer (2018) 0.06 
    0.05976234 = product of:
  0.11952468 = sum of:
    0.0073553314 = weight(_text_:a in 4666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0073553314 = score(doc=4666,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 4666, 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=4666)
    0.11216935 = weight(_text_:70 in 4666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11216935 = score(doc=4666,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.41413653 = fieldWeight in 4666, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4666)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Location
    A
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 70(2018) H.2, S.356-371
    Type
    a
  19. RDA: Resource Description and Access Print (2014) 0.06 
    0.057342894 = product of:
  0.076457195 = sum of:
    0.008916007 = weight(_text_:a in 2049) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008916007 = score(doc=2049,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 2049, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2049)
    0.06409677 = weight(_text_:70 in 2049) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06409677 = score(doc=2049,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.23664945 = fieldWeight in 2049, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2049)
    0.0034444188 = product of:
      0.0068888376 = sum of:
        0.0068888376 = weight(_text_:information in 2049) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0068888376 = score(doc=2049,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = queryNorm
            0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 2049, 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=2049)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Designed for the digital world and an expanding universe of metadata users, RDA: Resource Description and Access is the new, unified cataloguing standard. Benefits of RDA include: - A structure based on the conceptual models of FRBR (functional requirements for bibliographic data) and FRAD (functional requirements for authority data) to help catalog users find the information they need more easily - A flexible framework for content description of digital resources that also serves the needs of libraries organizing traditional resources - A better fit with emerging technologies, enabling institutions to introduce efficiencies in data capture and storage retrieval. The online RDA Toolkit provides a one-stop resource for evaluating and implementing RDA, and is the most effective way to interact with the new standard. It includes searchable and browseable RDA instructions; two views of RDA content, by table of contents and by element set; user-created and sharable Workflows and Mappings-tools to customize RDA to support your organization's training, internal processes, and local policies; Library of Congress-Program for Cooperative Cataloging Policy Statements (LC-PCC PS) and links to other relevant cataloguing resources; and the full text of AACR2 with links to RDA. This full-text print version of RDA offers a snapshot that serves as an offline access point to help solo and part-time cataloguers evaluate RDA, as well as to support training and classroom use in any size institution. An index is included. The online RDA Toolkit includes PDFs, but purchasing the print version offers a convenient, time-saving option.
    Content
    The 2014 RDA Print Revision contains: - A full accumulation of RDA-the revision contains a full set of all current RDA instructions. It replaces the previous version of RDA Print rather than being an update packet to that version. Numerous changes to the text of RDA have been made since the publication of the 2013 Revision. Cataloging practice described by RDA has not altered dramatically due to these changes, but over 70 percent of the pages in RDA Print were affected by the changes, making an RDA Print update packet impracticable. - The most current RDA-the revision contains all changes to RDA up to and including the 2014 RDA Update approved by the JSC. There are two types of changes to RDA that routinely take place-"Fast Track" changes and RDA Updates. The JSC periodically issues Fast Track changes to RDA to fix errors and to clarify meaning. These changes do not typically change cataloging practice as described by RDA. An RDA Update is issued annually. In an Update process the JSC considers proposals to enhance and improve RDA as a cataloging standard. An Update can and often does change the cataloging process described in RDA. The 2014 Revision includes all Fast Track changes and RDA Updates since the 2013 publication of RDA and through August 2014. Vgl. auch: http://www.rda-jsc.org.
  20. Gömpel, R.; Altenhöner, R.; Kunz, M.; Oehlschläger, S.; Werner, C.: Weltkongress Bibliothek und Information, 70. IFLA-Generalkonferenz in Buenos Aires : Aus den Veranstaltungen der Division IV Bibliographic Control, der Core Activities ICABS und UNIMARC sowie der Information Technology Section (2004) 0.05 
    0.053329814 = product of:
  0.07110642 = sum of:
    0.0036399448 = weight(_text_:a in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0036399448 = score(doc=2874,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.062410496 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
    0.045323264 = weight(_text_:70 in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045323264 = score(doc=2874,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.16733643 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
    0.02214321 = sum of:
      0.008437068 = weight(_text_:information in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.008437068 = score(doc=2874,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.09501803 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
      0.013706141 = weight(_text_:22 in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.013706141 = score(doc=2874,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    "Libraries: Tools for Education and Development" war das Motto der 70. IFLA-Generalkonferenz, dem Weltkongress Bibliothek und Information, der vom 22.-27. August 2004 in Buenos Aires, Argentinien, und damit erstmals in Lateinamerika stattfand. Rund 3.000 Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer, davon ein Drittel aus spanischsprachigen Ländern, allein 600 aus Argentinien, besuchten die von der IFLA und dem nationalen Organisationskomitee gut organisierte Tagung mit mehr als 200 Sitzungen und Veranstaltungen. Aus Deutschland waren laut Teilnehmerverzeichnis leider nur 45 Kolleginnen und Kollegen angereist, womit ihre Zahl wieder auf das Niveau von Boston gesunken ist. Erfreulicherweise gab es nunmehr bereits im dritten Jahr eine deutschsprachige Ausgabe des IFLA-Express. Auch in diesem Jahr soll hier über die Veranstaltungen der Division IV Bibliographic Control berichtet werden. Die Arbeit der Division mit ihren Sektionen Bibliography, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing sowie der neuen Sektion Knowledge Management bildet einen der Schwerpunkte der IFLA-Arbeit, die dabei erzielten konkreten Ergebnisse und Empfehlungen haben maßgeblichen Einfluss auf die tägliche Arbeit der Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. Erstmals wird auch ausführlich über die Arbeit der Core Activities ICABS und UNIMARC und der Information Technology Section berichtet.
    Content
    Cataloguing Section (Sektion Katalogisierung) Der Schwerpunkt der Arbeit dieser Sektion liegt auf der Erarbeitung bzw. internationalen Harmonisierung von Strukturen, Regeln und Arbeitsverfahren mit dem Ziel, die internationale Kooperation im Katalogisierungsbereich zu verbessern. In Anbetracht des laufenden Evaluierungsprozesses wurde der Strategieplan der Sektion zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt nur dort aktualisiert, wo es unbedingt erforderlich war. Neue Ziele wurden nicht aufgenommen. Oberste Priorität bei den strategischen Zielen behielt die Entwicklung internationaler Katalogisierungsstandards für die bibliographische Beschreibung und den Zugriff. In ihrer zentralen Bedeutung bestätigt wurden auch die "Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records" (FRBR). Darüber hinaus gehört auch in Zukunft die Weiterentwicklung und Revision der ISBDs zu den zentralen Anliegen der Arbeit der Sektion Katalogisierung. Ein weiteres vorrangiges Ziel bleibt die Erarbeitung von Standards, Regeln und Informationslisten, um den Zugang zu bibliographischen Daten in allen Sprachen zu ermöglichen. Hierzu zählen u. a.: - die vollständige Veröffentlichung der Anonymous Classics: Der Teil für europäische Literatur ist inzwischen veröffentlicht'. Für die Erarbeitung weiterer Teile (Lateinamerika, Afrika und Asien) soll das Verfahren gestrafft und ein Zeitplan erstellt werden. - die Beobachtung der Aktivitäten zu Unicode und die Information der Sektionsmitglieder darüber zur Förderung des mehrsprachigen Zugangs zu bibliographischer Information - die Entwicklung eines web-basierten multilingualen Wörterbuchs für Katalogisierungsbegriffe - die Entwicklung und der Test von (Daten-)Modellen für eine virtuelle internationale Normdatei - die Überarbeitung der "IFLA Names of persons". Das Open Programme der Sektion stand in diesem Jahr unter dem Motto "Developments in Cataloguing Guidelines" und wurde von Barbara Tillett, Lynne Howarth und Carol van Nuys bestritten. Lynne Howarth ging in ihrem Vortrag "Enabling metadata: creating a core record for resource discovery" auf die Reaktionen im weltweiten Stellungnahmeverfahren auf die Veröffentlichung des Papiers "Guidance an the Structure, Content and Application of Metadata Records for digital resources and collections" der Working Group an the Use of Metadata Schemes ein. Carol van Nuys stellte das norwegische "Paradigma Project and its quest for metadata solutions and services" vor.
    Aus den Arbeitsgruppen der Cataloguing Sektion: Schwerpunkt der Arbeiten der ISBD Review Group bleibt die Fortsetzung des generellen Revisionsprojekts. 2004 konnte die revidierte ISBD(G) veröffentlicht werden Für die Revision der ISBD(A) wurde eine Study Group aus Experten für das Alte Buch gebildet. Das weltweite Stellungnahmeverfahren ist für Frühjahr 2005 geplant. Bezüglich der Revision der ISBD(ER) konnten im weltweiten Stellungnahmeverfahren aufgekommene Fragen während der Sitzungen in Buenos Aires abschließend geklärt werden. Die Veröffentlichung der neuen ISBD(ER) ist für Ende 2004 / Anfang 2005 geplant. Die Revision der ISBD(CM) ist im Rahmen einer gemeinsamen Arbeitsgruppe der ISBD Review Group und der Sektion Geographie und Karten weiter vorangekommen. Für die Revision der ISBD(NBM) soll eine eigene Study Group gebildet werden. Die FRBR Review Group konnte erste Fortschritte bei der Erreichung der im vergangenen Jahr gesetzten Ziele Erarbeitung einer Richtlinie zur Anwendung der FRBR bei der Katalogisierung, Erweiterung der FRBR-Web-Seite im IFLAnet, um bei anderen communities (Archive, Museen etc.) für das Modell zu werben, sowie Überarbeitung des FRBR-Modells vermeIden. Von den in Berlin gebildeten fünf FRBR-Arbeitsgruppen (Expression entity Working Group, Working Group an continuing resources, Working Group an teaching and training, Working Group an subject relationships and classification, Working Group an FRBR/CRM dialogue) sind einige bereits aktiv gewesen, vor allem die letztgenannte Working Group an FRBR/CRM dialogue. Die "Working Group an subject relationships and classification" soll demnächst in Zusammenarbeit mit der Classification and Indexing Section etabliert werden. Ziel hierbei ist es, die FRBR auch auf den Bereich der Inhaltserschließung auszuweiten. Die "Working Group an continuing resources" hat in Buenos Aires beschlossen, ihre Arbeit nicht fortzuführen, da die FRBR in ihrer derzeitigen Fassung "seriality" nicht ausreichend berücksichtigen. Es ist geplant, eine neue Arbeitsgruppe unter Einbeziehung ausgewiesener Experten für fortlaufende Werke zu bilden, die sich mit diesem Problem beschäftigen soll. Für das IFLA Multilingual Dictionary of Cataloguing Terms and Concepts - MulDiCat' konnten die Richtlinien für die Eingabe in die Datenbank fertig gestellt und erforderliche Änderungen in der Datenbank implementiert werden. Die Datenbank dieses IFLA-Projekts enthält mittlerweile alle englischsprachigen Definitionen des AACR2-Glossars, die deutschen Übersetzungen der AACR2-Glossar-Definitionen sowie alle ISBD-Definitionen. Im nächsten Schritt sollen Einträge für die FRBR-Terminologie ergänzt werden. Ebenso sollen Ergänzungen zu den englischen Einträgen vorgenommen werden (aus AACR, ISBD, FRBR und weiteren IFLA-Publikationen). Die Guidelines for OPAC Displays (Richtlinien zur Präsentation von Suchergebnissen im OPAC) stehen nach der Durchführung des weltweiten Stellungnahmeverfahrens zur Veröffentlichung im IFLAnet bereit. Die Working Group an OPAC Displays hat damit ihre Arbeit beendet.
    Classification and Indexing Section (Sektion Klassifikation und Indexierung) Die Working Group an Guidelines for Multilingual Thesauri hat ihre Arbeit abgeschlossen, die Richtlinien werden Ende 2004 im IFLAnet zur Verfügung stehen. Die 2003 ins Leben gerufene Arbeitsgruppe zu Mindeststandards der Inhaltserschließung in Nationalbibliographien hat sich in Absprache mit den Mitgliedern des Standing Committee auf den Namen "Guidelines for minimal requirements for subject access by national bibliographic agencies" verständigt. Als Grundlage der zukünftigen Arbeit soll der "Survey an Subject Heading Languages Used in National Libraries and Bibliographies" von Magda HeinerFreiling dienen. Davon ausgehend soll eruiert werden, welche Arten von Medienwerken mit welchen Instrumentarien und in welcher Tiefe erschlossen werden. Eine weitere Arbeitsgruppe der Sektion befasst sich mit dem sachlichen Zugriff auf Netzpublikationen (Working Group an Subject Access to Web Resources). Die Veranstaltung "Implementation and adaption of global tools for subject access to local needs" fand regen Zuspruch. Drei Vortragende zeigten auf, wie in ihrem Sprachgebiet die Subject Headings der Library of Congress (LoC) übernommen werden (Development of a Spanish subject heading list und Subject indexing in Sweden) bzw. wie sich die Zusammenarbeit mit der LoC gestalten lässt, um den besonderen terminologischen Bedürfnissen eines Sprach- und Kulturraums außerhalb der USA Rechnung zu tragen (The SACO Program in Latin America). Aus deutscher Sicht verdiente der Vortrag "Subject indexing between international standards and local context - the Italian case" besondere Beachtung. Die Entwicklung eines Regelwerks zur verbalen Sacherschließung und die Erarbeitung einer italienischen Schlagwortnormdatei folgen nämlich erklärtermaßen der deutschen Vorgehensweise mit RSWK und SWD.
    Knowledge Management Section (Sektion Wissensmanagement) Ziel der neuen Sektion ist es, die Entwicklung und Implementierung des Wissensmanagements in Bibliotheken und Informationszentren zu fördern. Die Sektion will dafür eine internationale Plattform für die professionelle Kommunikation bieten und damit das Thema bekannter und allgemein verständlicher machen. Auf diese Weise soll seine Bedeutung auch für Bibliotheken und die mit ihm arbeitenden Einrichtungen herausgestellt werden. IFLA-CDNL Alliance for Bibliographic Standards (ICABS) Ein Jahr nach ihrer Gründung in Berlin hat die IFLA Core Activity "IFLA-CDNL Alliance for Bibliographic Standards (ICABS)" in Buenos Aires zum ersten Mal das Spektrum ihrer Arbeitsfelder einem großen Fachpublikum vorgestellt. Die IFLA Core Activity UNIMARC, einer der Partner der Allianz, hatte am Donnerstagvormittag zu einer Veranstaltung unter dem Titel "The holdings record as a bibliographic control tool" geladen. Am Nachmittag des selben Tages fand unter dem Titel "The new IFLA-CDNL Alliance for Bibliographic Standards - umbrella for multifaceted activities: strategies and practical ways to improve international coordination" die umfassende ICABS-Veranstaltung statt, die von der Generaldirektorin Der Deutschen Bibliothek, Dr. Elisabeth Niggemann, moderiert wurde. Nachdem die Vorsitzende des Advisory Board in ihrem Vortrag auf die Entstehungsgeschichte der Allianz eingegangen war, gab sie einen kurzen Oberblick über die Organisation und die Arbeit von ICABS als Dach der vielfältigen Aktivitäten im Bereich bibliographischer Standards. Vertreter aller in ICABS zusammengeschlossener Bibliotheken stellten im Anschluss daran ihre Arbeitsbereiche und -ergebnisse vor.
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

  • a 1731
  • el 95
  • m 85
  • b 17
  • s 17
  • n 9
  • r 8
  • x 5
  • ag 2
  • l 2
  • ? 1
  • p 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications