Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  • × theme_ss:"Datenformate"
  1. Beall, J.; Mitchell, J.S.: History of the representation of the DDC in the MARC Classification Format (2010) 0.03
    0.025459195 = product of:
      0.063647985 = sum of:
        0.040348392 = weight(_text_:context in 3568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040348392 = score(doc=3568,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17622331 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04251826 = queryNorm
            0.22896172 = fieldWeight in 3568, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3568)
        0.023299592 = weight(_text_:system in 3568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023299592 = score(doc=3568,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04251826 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 3568, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3568)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    This article explores the history of the representation of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) in the Machine Readable Cataloging (MARC) formats, with a special emphasis on the development of the MARC classification format. Until 2009, the format used to represent the DDC has been a proprietary one that predated the development of the MARC classification format. The need to replace the current editorial support system, the desire to deliver DDC data in a variety of formats to support different uses, and the increasingly global context of editorial work with translation partners around the world prompted the Dewey editorial team, along with OCLC research and development colleagues, to rethink the underlying representation of the DDC and choose the MARC 21 formats for classification and authority data. The discussion is framed with quotes from the writings of Nancy J. Williamson, whose analysis of the content of the Library of Congress Classification (LCC) schedules played a key role in shaping the original MARC classification format.
  2. Manguinhas, H.; Freire, N.; Machado, J.; Borbinha, J.: Supporting multilingual bibliographic resource discovery with Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (2012) 0.03
    0.025459195 = product of:
      0.063647985 = sum of:
        0.040348392 = weight(_text_:context in 133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040348392 = score(doc=133,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17622331 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04251826 = queryNorm
            0.22896172 = fieldWeight in 133, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=133)
        0.023299592 = weight(_text_:system in 133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023299592 = score(doc=133,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04251826 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 133, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=133)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    This paper describes an experiment exploring the hypothesis that innovative application of the Functional Require-ments for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) principles can complement traditional bibliographic resource discovery systems in order to improve the user experience. A specialized service was implemented that, when given a plain list of results from a regular online catalogue, was able to process, enrich and present that list in a more relevant way for the user. This service pre-processes the records of a traditional online catalogue in order to build a semantic structure following the FRBR model. The service also explores web search features that have been revolutionizing the way users conceptualize resource discovery, such as relevance ranking and metasearching. This work was developed in the context of the TELPlus project. We processed nearly one hundred thousand bibliographic and authority records, in multiple languages, and originating from twelve European na-tional libraries. This paper describes the architecture of the service and the main challenges faced, especially concerning the extraction and linking of the relevant FRBR entities from the bibliographic metadata produced by the libraries. The service was evaluated by end users, who filled out a questionnaire after using a traditional online catalogue and the new service, both with the same bibliographic collection. The analysis of the results supports the hypothesis that FRBR can be implemented for re-source discovery in a non-intrusive way, reusing the data of any existing traditional bibliographic system.
  3. Birkner, M.: VuFind an der AK Bibliothek Wien (2015) 0.01
    0.006523886 = product of:
      0.03261943 = sum of:
        0.03261943 = weight(_text_:system in 1833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03261943 = score(doc=1833,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04251826 = queryNorm
            0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 1833, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1833)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    In diesem Artikel geht es um die bisherigen Tests der AK Bibliothek Wien mit dem Discovery System VuFind. Es handelt sich um eine mögliche Alternative zu Primo, einer weit verbreiteten proprietären Suchlösung an österreichsischen Bibliotheken. Nach einem kurzen technischen Überblick wird beschrieben, welche Entwicklungen und Anpassungen vorgenommen werden mussten, um eine Kompatibilität zwischen VuFind und den in der AK Bibliothek vorherrschenden Bedingungen zu schaffen. Dabei wird näher auf die Verarbeitung des Datenformats MAB2 sowie die Schnittstellen zum Bibliothekssystem Aleph und dem Bibliotheks-Repository eingegangen. Die ersten Ergebnisse werden präsentiert und noch zu lösende Probleme angesprochen. Zudem wird ein Ausblick auf zukünftige Vorhaben gegeben.
  4. Mensing, P.: Planung und Durchführung von Digitalisierungsprojekten am Beispiel nicht-textueller Materialien (2010) 0.01
    0.0062790583 = product of:
      0.03139529 = sum of:
        0.03139529 = weight(_text_:index in 3577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03139529 = score(doc=3577,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18579477 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04251826 = queryNorm
            0.16897833 = fieldWeight in 3577, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3577)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Content
    Darin auch: "2.7 Erschließung der Digitalisate Die formale Erschließung von gedruckten Beständen wird in Deutschland nach RAK-WB bzw. RAK-OB durchgeführt. Im Gegensatz zu Druckwerken, die meist alle wichtigen Informationen selbst enthalten (Impressum), sind in oder an Kunstwerken und Bildern meist keine Angaben wie Autor, Künstler oder Entstehungsjahr zu finden. Für die Formalerfassung von Nichtbuchmaterialien sind in Deutschland die "Regeln für die alphabetische Katalogisierung von Nichtbuchmaterialien" anzuwenden (RAK-NBM), eine Erweiterung der o.g. RAK. Zur Erschließung von Kunstwerken wurde seit den 70er Jahren des 20. Jhds. die Marburger-Index-Datenbank (MIDAS) entwickelt, die auf dem AKL, ICONCLASS und auch RAK aufbaut. MIDAS findet hauptsächlich in Museen Anwendung, konnte sich aber aufgrund der nicht verbindlichen Nutzung nicht durchsetzen. Ebenfalls aus dem Museumsbereich stammt CIDOC CRM, das seit 2006 ISO-zertifiziert ist (ISO 21127:2006) und der Datenfeldkatalog zur Grundinventarisation. Um die inhaltliche Erschließung von Bibliotheksbeständen einheitlich gestalten zu können, wurde die Schlagwortnormdatei entwickelt. Diese Datei ist universell ausgerichtet und ist daher für Spezialgebiete nicht tief genug ausgearbeitet. Im kunsthistorischen Bereich sind daher außerdem u.a. der AA und der AGM von Bedeutung. Als Klassifizierungssystem steht ICONCLASS zur Verfügung. Bei der inhaltlichen Erschließung ist darauf zu achten, dass irrelevante Informationen nicht zur unnötigen Vergrößerung des Kataloges führen. Um durchgängig eine größtmögliche Nutzerorientierung bieten zu können, sollten die gewünschten Prioritäten der Erschließung in einer Richtlinie festgehalten werden. Zur Interpretation von Bildern wurde von Panofsky ein 3-Stufen-Modell entwickelt, dass sich in prä- oder vor-ikonografische, ikonografische Beschreibung und ikonologische Interpretation unterteilen lässt. In der ersten Stufe werden nur die dargestellten Dinge oder Personen skizziert, ohne ihre Bedeutung zueinander zu interpretieren. Dies erfolgt erst in der zweiten Stufe. Hier wird das Ahema des Kunstwerkes allerdings ohne weitere Deutung benannt. In der dritten Stufe wird schließlich geklärt, warum dieses Werk so geschaffen wurde und nicht anders.
  5. Springer: Neues Online-Tool zum Herunterladen (2011) 0.00
    0.0027127003 = product of:
      0.013563501 = sum of:
        0.013563501 = product of:
          0.0406905 = sum of:
            0.0406905 = weight(_text_:29 in 4716) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0406905 = score(doc=4716,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14956595 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04251826 = queryNorm
                0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 4716, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4716)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    4. 6.2012 13:28:29
  6. Aslanidi, M.; Papadakis, I.; Stefanidakis, M.: Name and title authorities in the music domain : alignment of UNIMARC authorities format with RDA (2018) 0.00
    0.0026882975 = product of:
      0.013441487 = sum of:
        0.013441487 = product of:
          0.04032446 = sum of:
            0.04032446 = weight(_text_:22 in 5178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04032446 = score(doc=5178,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1488917 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04251826 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5178, 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=5178)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    19. 3.2019 12:17:22
  7. Zapounidou, S.; Sfakakis, M.; Papatheodorou, C.: Library data integration : towards BIBFRAME mapping to EDM (2014) 0.00
    0.0023251716 = product of:
      0.011625858 = sum of:
        0.011625858 = product of:
          0.034877572 = sum of:
            0.034877572 = weight(_text_:29 in 1589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034877572 = score(doc=1589,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14956595 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04251826 = queryNorm
                0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 1589, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1589)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 8th Research Conference, MTSR 2014, Karlsruhe, Germany, November 27-29, 2014, Proceedings. Eds.: S. Closs et al
  8. Miller, E.; Ogbuji, U.: Linked data design for the visible library (2015) 0.00
    0.0023251716 = product of:
      0.011625858 = sum of:
        0.011625858 = product of:
          0.034877572 = sum of:
            0.034877572 = weight(_text_:29 in 2773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034877572 = score(doc=2773,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14956595 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04251826 = queryNorm
                0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2773, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2773)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 41(2015) no.4, S.23-29
  9. Lee, S.; Jacob, E.K.: ¬An integrated approach to metadata interoperability : construction of a conceptual structure between MARC and FRBR (2011) 0.00
    0.0023042548 = product of:
      0.011521274 = sum of:
        0.011521274 = product of:
          0.03456382 = sum of:
            0.03456382 = weight(_text_:22 in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03456382 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1488917 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04251826 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 302, 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=302)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22