Search (383 results, page 1 of 20)

0.06467395 = product of:
  0.2586958 = sum of:
    0.2586958 = weight(_text_:having in 6501) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2586958 = score(doc=6501,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.7476445 = fieldWeight in 6501, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6501)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Examines the issue of outsourcing to obtain the shelf ready book from the aspect of public services and the viewpoint of a library administrator. Questions the necessity of having totally in house cataloguing. Highlights the advantages of having outside cataloguing and supplementary services. Outsourcing should not replace cataloguing departments but be dependent on circumstances. The main reasons for its implementation should be improved services rather than financial savings

0.045731388 = product of:
  0.18292555 = sum of:
    0.18292555 = weight(_text_:having in 3758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18292555 = score(doc=3758,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.52866447 = fieldWeight in 3758, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3758)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Reports on a study which aimed to determine the extent to which cataloguing can be reduced when cataloguing a book for a single screen minicat results from a search using the surname of the author of the book. The results show that the percentage of books having personal authors that are catalogued in a research library that will become entries in a 1 screen minicat is 35.6 when searched. Library could significantly reduce cataloguing expenditures by simplifying cataloguing nearly 2/5s of the time

0.045731388 = product of:
  0.18292555 = sum of:
    0.18292555 = weight(_text_:having in 498) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18292555 = score(doc=498,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.52866447 = fieldWeight in 498, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=498)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Archival records having a common creator are described collectively in finding aids known as inventories, which like archival collections themselves are arranged by file series. Collection level MARC records direct users not to individual documents, but to finding aids. Repositories may also develop other tools to describe their holdings such as automated in-house indexes, subject specific lists, and published guides. In the near future, MARC records and finding aids should be linked electronically, with both available through searchable databases on the Internet

0.045731388 = product of:
  0.18292555 = sum of:
    0.18292555 = weight(_text_:having in 4053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18292555 = score(doc=4053,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.52866447 = fieldWeight in 4053, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4053)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Examines in detail the author cataloguing practices adopted by the Italian National Library Service, as set out in its 1995 Cataloguing Guide (Guida SBN), and discusses how far these practices accord with the standard 1979 RICA author cataloguing rules. Since the author headings prescribed by RICA include personal names, corporate names and titles, this survey looks at all such SBN catalogue entries having an access point function. Presents many examples of standard and variant forms of heading, and reviews control procedures

0.040014964 = product of:
  0.16005985 = sum of:
    0.16005985 = weight(_text_:having in 1109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16005985 = score(doc=1109,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.4625814 = fieldWeight in 1109, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1109)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Financial crisis in many libraries in the USA are leading to catalogue managers finding themselves faced with growing backlogs and fewer people to handle them. Considers the use of minimal level cataloging (MLC) to alleviate the problem. AACR2 allows for considerable variation in the amount of detail cataloguers can provide. Discusses the creation of a local MLC standard which could allow varying levels of description according to type of material. The financial realities of the 1990s mean that the ideal of creating a perfect catalogue record for each title must be balanced agianst the desirability of having a bibliographic record, albeit an imperfect one, available to patrons in the near future

0.034298543 = product of:
  0.13719417 = sum of:
    0.13719417 = weight(_text_:having in 656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13719417 = score(doc=656,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.39649835 = fieldWeight in 656, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=656)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Catalogers in larger libraries have web access on their desktops, which puts many resources just a click away. Cataloging tools and documentation are available through web browser interfaces. Many library online catalogs are accessible for searching class numbers and other cataloging information. Web sites of publishers, governmental agencies, and individual authors abound, providing a wealth of information. Having this information readily available has had an impact on cataloging. The ability to have more than one open window on the desktop enables catalogers to copy and paste cataloging information from multiple sources. Web resources provide critical information about the context for the item in hand, resulting in better cataloging records and more accurate access points. This article discusses and gives examples of ways that information found on the web can be used to facilitate cataloging processes.

0.034298543 = product of:
  0.13719417 = sum of:
    0.13719417 = weight(_text_:having in 735) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13719417 = score(doc=735,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.39649835 = fieldWeight in 735, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=735)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In an attempt to ascertain whether academic libraries were having difficulty in filling cataloging positions, a survey was designed and distributed to those libraries that advertised for full-time cataloging positions in College and Research Libraries News between July 2000 and June 2002. While a number of studies done in the last decade had examined the content of job advertisements, this study tried to determine the actual outcomes of individual library searches by contacting libraries that had advertised. Using a web-based questionnaire, the authors queried these institutions on their recruitment process and hiring success. The results of this survey provided confirmation of a continued, if not increasing, difficulty in recruiting catalogers for academic libraries. Some implications for a wider debate on library school training and the general direction of the profession are discussed.

0.034298543 = product of:
  0.13719417 = sum of:
    0.13719417 = weight(_text_:having in 313) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13719417 = score(doc=313,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.39649835 = fieldWeight in 313, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=313)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Bibliographic Control Division of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) consists of three sections: bibliography, cataloguing, and classification. The cataloguing section, which focuses on descriptive cataloguing, is one of the oldest within IFLA, having been founded in 1935 as the IFLA Committee on Uniform Cataloguing Rules. It became the Committee on Cataloguing in 1970. The committee played a key role in planning and convening the International Conference on Cataloguing Principles held in Paris in 1961 and the International Meeting of Cataloguing Experts held in Copenhagen in 1969. The Copenhagen conference provided the impetus to develop the International Standard Bibliographic Descriptions (ISBD). The Committee on Cataloguing established a systematic process for the revision of the ISBDs. The cataloguing section focuses on traditional cataloguing standards and on the impact of electronic resources and technology on these standards. The section has initiated several projects at the international level to facilitate access to information.

0.034298543 = product of:
  0.13719417 = sum of:
    0.13719417 = weight(_text_:having in 2941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13719417 = score(doc=2941,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.39649835 = fieldWeight in 2941, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2941)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Efforts at networking and cooperation have flourished for some time at the University of the West Indies (UWI), a regional institution in the English-speaking Caribbean. Due to their common mission and shared goals, libraries within the system have collaborated on projects to enhance the services provided to their clients. In its attempt at collaboration, the Mona Campus established the UWI Mona Information Network, the primary goal of which is the creation of a campus-wide online catalog with member libraries having access to a larger pool of resources. Most of the departmental libraries within the system have struggled with their inability to adequately acquire and provide access to their collections. To this end some of these libraries have collaborated with the UWI Library to have their holdings added to the online public access catalog (OPAC). This article presents an overview of the collaborative efforts of the UWI Mona Libraries.

0.034298543 = product of:
  0.13719417 = sum of:
    0.13719417 = weight(_text_:having in 4587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13719417 = score(doc=4587,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.39649835 = fieldWeight in 4587, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4587)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The vast majority of the current author name disambiguation solutions are designed to disambiguate a whole digital library (DL) at once considering the entire repository. However, these solutions besides being very expensive and having scalability problems, also may not benefit from eventual manual corrections, as they may be lost whenever the process of disambiguating the entire repository is required. In the real world, in which repositories are updated on a daily basis, incremental solutions that disambiguate only the newly introduced citation records, are likely to produce improved results in the long run. However, the problem of incremental author name disambiguation has been largely neglected in the literature. In this article we present a new author name disambiguation method, specially designed for the incremental scenario. In our experiments, our new method largely outperforms recent incremental proposals reported in the literature as well as the current state-of-the-art non-incremental method.

0.034298543 = product of:
  0.13719417 = sum of:
    0.13719417 = weight(_text_:having in 2163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13719417 = score(doc=2163,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.39649835 = fieldWeight in 2163, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2163)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Linked Open Data (LOD) are a set of principles for publishing structured, connected data available for reuse under an open license. The objective of this paper is to analyze the publishing of bibliographic data such as LOD, having as a product the elaboration of theoretical-methodological recommendations for the publication of these data, in an approach based on the ten best practices for publishing LOD, from the World Wide Web Consortium. The starting point was the conduction of a Systematic Review of Literature, where initiatives to publish bibliographic data such as LOD were identified. An empirical study of these institutions was also conducted. As a result, theoretical-methodological recommendations were obtained for the process of publishing bibliographic data such as LOD.

0.02858212 = product of:
  0.11432848 = sum of:
    0.11432848 = weight(_text_:having in 278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11432848 = score(doc=278,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.3304153 = fieldWeight in 278, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=278)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In January 1999, the Program for Cooperative Cataloging approved the core bibliographic standard for rare books, called the DCRB Core standard. Like the other core standards, the DCRB Core provides the framework within which catalogers can create bibliographic records that are less than full, but are as reliable as full-level records in description and authorized headings. In the three years since its approval, there is little evidence that the standard has been widely used. This study reports the results of a survey sent to forty-three participants who indicated in a preliminary query that they do use the DCRB Core or that they have made the decision not to use it. In the thirty-seven surveys that were returned, only about 16% of the respondents said they have used the standard to create bibliographic records for their rare books. The libraries that do not use the core standard find it inferior or lacking in a number of ways. Several of those libraries, however, are planning to use the standard in the future or are seriously planning to investigate using it. Such intent may indicate that the time is approaching when more libraries will find reasons to implement the standard. One impetus may come from the findings of a recent survey of the special collections departments of member libraries of the Association of Research Libraries that emphasize the size of the backlogs in those departments. If faster accessibility to specific portions of the backlogs would benefit users more than having fulllevel cataloging, application of the DCRB Core standard could facilitate reducing those backlogs.

0.02858212 = product of:
  0.11432848 = sum of:
    0.11432848 = weight(_text_:having in 747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11432848 = score(doc=747,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.3304153 = fieldWeight in 747, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=747)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - This study attempts to compare the National Library of Malaysia (NLM)'s cataloguing in publication (CIP) records with their permanent records in the NLM's online public access catalogue (OPAC) database. Design/methodology/approach - The study compares the description of records in the NLM CIP versus NLM OPAC in terms of similarities and differences in the bibliographic elements for each record. The study selected the NLM's CIP records from January to April 2000, allowing more than 5 years for publishers to publish the registered CIP titles and also the NLM to make the records available in their OPAC database. Findings - The findings indicate that libraries that use NLM's CIP records in their copy cataloguing activity should not rely 100 per cent on the records. Verifications and modifications need to be carried out to ensure accuracy and quality of their catalogue records. Research limitations/implications - That Malaysian experience confirms research carried out previously elsewhere. Practical implications - The findings of the study are significant in terms of giving data about whether NLM's CIP records are trustworthy sources for the practical task of copy cataloguing or not. Originality/value - Although comparison studies of the accuracy and consistency of CIP records versus OPAC records are commonplace, having been conducted extensively since the 1980s in a variety of contexts, such a comparison study of CIP records versus OPAC records has never been conducted in Malaysia. With the increased usage of web-based OPACs as one source option for copy cataloguing, it is imperative to ensure the records copied are consistent and accurate to avoid post-alteration of the bibliographic description.

0.02858212 = product of:
  0.11432848 = sum of:
    0.11432848 = weight(_text_:having in 3506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11432848 = score(doc=3506,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.3304153 = fieldWeight in 3506, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3506)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

This paper looks at approaches to name authority control in repository contexts and describes the work of the Names project, which has been funded to investigate issues surrounding the identification of individuals and institutions within repositories of research outputs in the United Kingdom. The problem of uniquely identifying authors has been with us ever since books have been catalogued. National libraries have been creating name authority files for authors of books for many years, starting with card catalogues and now maintaining electronic files in MARC format. However, authority files for the creators of journal articles do not tend to exist in library systems. The increasing use of subject-based and institutional repositories to hold working papers, reports, research data, and pre-refereed and post-referred versions of articles has led to a corresponding rise in the number of authors identified in such systems. Without having a means of uniquely and unambiguously identifying the creators of materials in repositories, it becomes difficult to be sure whether all the materials related to a particular author will be correctly associated with that individual. Names of authors may be entered in more than one way, or more than one author may have exactly the same name. This article looks at recent attempts to address this problem in the repository environment and goes on to explain the approach that is planned to be taken in the Names project.

0.02858212 = product of:
  0.11432848 = sum of:
    0.11432848 = weight(_text_:having in 2903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11432848 = score(doc=2903,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.3304153 = fieldWeight in 2903, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2903)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Teaching cataloguing requires the instructor to make strategic decisions about how to approach the variety and complexity of the field and to provide an adequate theoretical foundation while preparing students for their entry into the world of practice. Accompanying these challenges are the tactical demands of providing this instruction in a distance education environment. Rather than focusing on ways to support learners in catalogue record production, instructors may use a problem solving and decision making approach to instruction. In this paper, a way to conceptualize a decision making approach that builds on a foundation provided by theories of information navigation is described. This approach, which is called "wayfinding", teaches by having students learn to find their way in the sets of rules that are commonly used. The method focuses on instruction about the structural features of rule sets, providing basic definitions of what each of the "places" in the rule sets contain (e.g., "formatting personal names" in Chapter 22 of AACR2R) and about ways to navigate those structures, enabling students to learn not only about common rules but also about less well known cataloguing practices ("dragons"). It provides both pragmatic and pedagogical benefits and helps develop links between cataloguing practices and their theoretical foundations.

0.02858212 = product of:
  0.11432848 = sum of:
    0.11432848 = weight(_text_:having in 3952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11432848 = score(doc=3952,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.3304153 = fieldWeight in 3952, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3952)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Toolkit designed by the RDA Steering Committee makes Resource Description and Access available on the web, together with other useful documents (workflows, mappings, etc.). Reading, learning and memorizing are interconnected, and a working tool should make these activities faster and easier to perform. Some issues arise while verifying the real easiness of use and learning of the tool. The practical and formal requirements for a cataloguing code include plain language, ease of memorisation, clarity of instructions, familiarity for users, predictability and reproducibility of solutions, and general usability. From a formal point of view, the RDA text does not appear to be conceived for an uninterrupted reading, but just for reading of few paragraphs for temporary catalographic needs. From a content point of view, having a syndetic view of the description of a resource is rather difficult: catalographic details are scattered and their re-organization is not easy. The visualisation and logical organisation in the Toolkit could be improved: the table of contents occupies a sizable portion of the screen and resizing or hiding it is not easy; the indentation leaves little space to the words; inhomogeneous font styles (italic and bold) and poor contrast between background and text colours make reading not easy; simultaneous visualization of two or more parts of the text is not allowed; and Toolkit's icons are less intuitive than expected. In the conclusion, some suggestions on how to improve the Toolkit's aspects and usability are provided.

0.022865694 = product of:
  0.091462776 = sum of:
    0.091462776 = weight(_text_:having in 4284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.091462776 = score(doc=4284,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.26433223 = fieldWeight in 4284, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4284)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The original Statement of Principles - commonly known as the "Paris Principles" - was approved by the International Conference on Cataloguing Principles in 1961. Its goal of serving as a basis for international standardization in cataloguing has certainly been achieved: most of the cataloguing codes that were developed worldwide since that time have followed the Principles strictly or at least to a high degree. More than fifty years later, having a common set of international cataloguing principles is still necessary as cataloguers and users around the world use online catalogues as search and discovery systems. At the beginning of the 21st century, IFLA produced a new statement of principles (published in 2009) applicable to online library catalogues and beyond. The current version has been reviewed and updated in 2014 and 2015, and approved in 2016. The 2009 Statement of Principles replaced and explicitly broadened the scope of the Paris Principles from just textual resources to all types of resources, and from just the choice and form of entry to all aspects of bibliographic and authority data used in library catalogues. It included not only principles and objectives, but also guiding rules that should be included in cataloguing codes internationally, as well as guidance on search and retrieval capabilities. This 2016 edition takes into consideration new categories of users, the open access environment, the interoperability and the accessibility of data, features of discovery tools and the significant change of user behaviour in general. This statement builds on the great cataloguing traditions of the world, as well as on the conceptual models in the IFLA Functional Requirements family.

0.019060155 = product of:
  0.07624062 = sum of:
    0.07624062 = weight(_text_:und in 6246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07624062 = score(doc=6246,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.5942039 = fieldWeight in 6246, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6246)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Vorstellung eines Erfassungsschemas zur formalen und inhaltlichen Erschließung von Leichenpredigten am Beispiel der Leichenpredigtensammlung der Magdeburger Universitätsbibliothek.

Source

Bibliothek: Forschung und Praxis. 3(1979) H.2, S.112-121

0.01886466 = product of:
  0.07545864 = sum of:
    0.07545864 = weight(_text_:und in 6903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07545864 = score(doc=6903,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.58810925 = fieldWeight in 6903, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6903)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Altes Buch und Neue Medien: Vorträge und Kommissionssitzungen. Der österreichische Bibliothekartag 1992, Eisenstadt, 29.9.-3.10.1992. Hrsg.: Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare

0.01886466 = product of:
  0.07545864 = sum of:
    0.07545864 = weight(_text_:und in 2651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07545864 = score(doc=2651,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.58810925 = fieldWeight in 2651, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2651)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Der neue Erschliessungsstandard RDA beschäftigt aktuell unzählige Arbeitsgruppen und Einzelpersonen aus verschiedenen Ländern. Dabei geht es vor allem um die Anpassung einzelner Regeln und Konzepte an lokale Gegebenheiten und spezifische Medientypen. Das erklärte Ziel, den Standard auch für nicht-bibliothekarische Communities attraktiv zu machen, stand jedoch bislang im Hintergrund. Es ist unklar, ob und wie sich RDA beispielsweise in Archiven und Sondersammlungen anwenden lässt. Diese Bachelorarbeit widmet sich dieser Unsicherheit und untersucht die Möglichkeiten der Katalogisierung von ausgewählten archivalischen Ressourcen. Mittels einer Literaturanalyse werden die von Nutzern und Erschliessenden als essenziell erachteten Merkmale von Briefen und Fotografien erhoben und auf die Beschreibungsmöglichkeiten mit RDA hin untersucht. Dabei zeigt sich, dass der Standard grundsätzlich aufgeschlossen gegenüber archivalischen und historischen Ressourcen ist und sich lediglich vereinzelte Anpassungen von Begriffslisten und An- wendungsregeln empfehlen. Entscheidende Fragestellungen, wie die Abbildung von Kontextualität und Hierarchien, müssen jedoch noch geklärt werden, um die Attraktivität des Standards für nicht-bibliothekarische Communities weiter zu verbessern.

Imprint

Chur : Hochschule für Technik und Wirtschaft