Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.039052885 = product of:
  0.15621154 = sum of:
    0.15621154 = weight(_text_:headings in 2960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15621154 = score(doc=2960,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2943326 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0606571 = queryNorm
        0.5307314 = fieldWeight in 2960, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2960)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

LCSH

FRSAD (Conceptual model) / Subject headings

Subject

FRSAD (Conceptual model) / Subject headings

0.023669623 = product of:
  0.09467849 = sum of:
    0.09467849 = weight(_text_:headings in 3433) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09467849 = score(doc=3433,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2943326 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0606571 = queryNorm
        0.32167178 = fieldWeight in 3433, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3433)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This report presents the results of desk-top based study of projects and initiatives in the area of linking and mapping subject tools. While its goal is to provide areas of further study for cross-language subject access in the European Library, and specifically the national libraries of the Ten New Member States, it is not restricted to cross-language mappings since some of the tools used to create links across thesauri or subject headings in the same language may also be appropriate for cross-language mapping. Tools reviewed have been selected to represent a variety of approaches (e.g. subject heading to subject heading, thesaurus to thesaurus, classification to subject heading) reflecting the variety of subject access tools in use in the European Library. The results show that there is no single solution that would be appropriate for all libraries but that parts of several initiatives may be applicable on a technical, organisational or content level.

0.015779749 = product of:
  0.063118994 = sum of:
    0.063118994 = weight(_text_:headings in 3646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.063118994 = score(doc=3646,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2943326 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0606571 = queryNorm
        0.21444786 = fieldWeight in 3646, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3646)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

1. Introduction In this paper we address two questions: 1. What is the position of subject indexing in the thinking of the library world after the publication of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (1998)? 2. Is this position in accordance with the requirements of the users searching for documents about a given subject? Research Shows that searching an a topic (i.e. subject access) is an important, even predominant type of end-user searching of library catalogues and even more so of other bibliographic databases. Between one third and two thirds of all OPAC searches are probably subject searches (Large & Beheshti, 199%). Taking into account different ways in which searching an a topic is implemented in library catalogues (subject headings, classification, keywords only) the percentage may be even higher. For example title word searching may be a substitute for subject searching if no better tools are available. In the light of this it is not surprising that the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) (1998) pays attention to subject searching, as well as the Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records (FRANAR) (2003). Also the Statement of International Cataloguing Principles: Final draft of 19 December 2003, which is the result of the first First IFLA Meeting of Experts an an International Cataloguing Code mentiong subject access as a function of cataloguing (Statement, 2003). In this paper we discuss the ways these three documents deal with subjects.

0.007371489 = product of:
  0.029485956 = sum of:
    0.029485956 = weight(_text_:und in 3094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029485956 = score(doc=3094,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.13453132 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0606571 = queryNorm
        0.2191754 = fieldWeight in 3094, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3094)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Paper presented at: IFLA WLIC 2015 - Cape Town, South Africa in Session 207 - Cataloguing. Vgl. den Kommentar von H. Wiesenmüller [Mail vom 25.06.2015]: "hier etwas höchst Spannendes - eine knappe Darstellung des konsolidierten FR-Modells, auf das wir schon so lange warten, und das im kommenden Jahr in das weltweite Begutachtungsverfahren gehen soll: http://library.ifla.org/1084/. Ich muss das Paper selbst auch erst in Ruhe lesen, sehe aber beim schnellen Durchblättern mit Freude bestätigt, dass die Gruppe-3-Entitäten aus FRBR tatsächlich abgeschafft werden. Die FRSAD-Entität "Thema" (die für alles stehen kann, was Thema eins Werks ist) wird umgetauft in "Res" (von lateinisch "res", Sache) und steht für "any entity in the universe of discourse". Die Entitäten der Gruppe 2 heißen jetzt zusammenfassend "Agent" und teilen sich auf in "Person" und "Group", wobei letzteres Körperschaften und Familien umfasst. Neu eingeführt wird "Time-span". Auf den ersten Blick scheint das jedenfalls alles ganz gut durchdacht zu sein."

0.0057691024 = product of:
  0.02307641 = sum of:
    0.02307641 = weight(_text_:und in 787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02307641 = score(doc=787,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13453132 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0606571 = queryNorm
        0.17153187 = fieldWeight in 787, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=787)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Series

Bibliotheca Academica - Reihe Informations- und Bibliothekswissenschaften; Bd. 1

0.0049449448 = product of:
  0.019779779 = sum of:
    0.019779779 = weight(_text_:und in 2682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019779779 = score(doc=2682,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13453132 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0606571 = queryNorm
        0.14702731 = fieldWeight in 2682, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2682)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Kompatibilität, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation - Compatibility, Media and Ethics in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings der 10. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation Wien, 3.-5. Juli 2006 - Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the German Section of the International Society of Knowledge Organization Vienna, 3-5 July 2006. Ed.: H.P. Ohly, S. Netscher u. K. Mitgutsch