Diese Datenbank enthält über 40.000 Dokumente zu Themen aus den Bereichen Formalerschließung – Inhaltserschließung – Information Retrieval.
© 2015 W. Gödert, TH Köln, Institut für Informationswissenschaft / Powered by litecat, BIS Oldenburg (Stand: 28. April 2022)
1O'Neill, E. ; Zumer, M. ; Mixter, J.: FRBR aggregates : their types and frequency in library collections.
In: Library resources and technical services. 59(2015) no.3, S.120-129.
Abstract: Aggregates have been a frequent topic of discussion between library science researchers. This study seeks to better understand aggregates through the analysis of a sample of bibliographic records and review of the cataloging treatment of aggregates. The study focuses on determining how common aggregates are in library collections, what types of aggregates exist, how aggregates are described in bibliographic records, and the criteria for identifying aggregates from the information in bibliographic records. A sample of bibliographic records representing textual resources was taken from OCLC's WorldCat database. More than 20 percent of the sampled records represented aggregates and more works were embodied in aggregates than were embodied in single work manifestations. A variety of issues, including cataloging practices and the varying definitions of aggregates, made it difficult to accurately identify and quantify the presence of aggregates using only the information from bibliographic records.
Inhalt: Vgl.: DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/lrts.59n3.120.
2Mixter, J. ; Childress, E.R.: FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology) users : summary and case studies.
Dublin, OH : OCLC Research, 2013. 52 S.
Abstract: Over the past ten years, various organizations, both public and private, have expressed interest in implementing FAST in their cataloging workflows. As interest in FAST has grown, so too has interest in knowing how FAST is being used and by whom. Since 2002 eighteen institutions (see table 1) in six countries have expressed interest in learning more about FAST and how it could be implemented in cataloging workflows. Currently OCLC is aware of nine agencies that have actually adopted or support FAST for resource description. This study, the first systematic census of FAST users undertaken by OCLC, was conducted, in part, to address these inquiries. Its purpose was to examine: � how FAST is being utilized; � why FAST was chosen as the cataloging vocabulary; � what benefits FAST provides; and � what can be done to enhance the value of FAST. Interview requests were sent to all parties that had previously contacted OCLC about FAST. Of the eighteen organizations contacted, sixteen agreed to provide information about their decision whether to use FAST (nine adopters, seven non-adopters). ; This document presents: � a brief overview of FAST; � a brief analysis of common characteristics of parties that have either chosen to adopt FAST or chosen against using FAST; � suggested improvements for FAST vocabulary and services; � tables summarizing FAST adopters and non-adopters; and � sixteen individual "case studies" presented as edited write-ups of interviews.
Inhalt: Text unter: http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/publications/library/2013/2013-04.pdf.
Anmerkung: Rez. in: Cataloging and classification quarterly 53(2015) no.2, S.247-249 (Shelby E. Harken)
Themenfeld: Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
Objekt: FAST ; LCSH