Search (391 results, page 1 of 20)

0.10175028 = product of:
  0.4070011 = sum of:
    0.4070011 = weight(_text_:heading in 4396) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.4070011 = score(doc=4396,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        1.0693184 = fieldWeight in 4396, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4396)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.08811833 = product of:
  0.35247332 = sum of:
    0.35247332 = weight(_text_:heading in 434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.35247332 = score(doc=434,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.9260569 = fieldWeight in 434, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=434)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The principle of uniform heading underlies the rules for headings in descriptive cataloging in the American tradition. The rationale and the evolution of the principle are examined and its implications discussed in terms of the history of cataloging codes. The ideal embodied in the principle of uniform heading has been undergoing gradual modification in recent codes and considerably compromised in cataloging practice today.

0.063593924 = product of:
  0.2543757 = sum of:
    0.2543757 = weight(_text_:heading in 5991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2543757 = score(doc=5991,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.668324 = fieldWeight in 5991, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5991)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.058914576 = product of:
  0.11782915 = sum of:
    0.04588084 = weight(_text_:und in 3874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04588084 = score(doc=3874,freq=90.0), product of:
        0.13955593 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.3287631 = fieldWeight in 3874, product of:
          9.486833 = tf(freq=90.0), with freq of:
            90.0 = termFreq=90.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3874)
    0.07194831 = weight(_text_:heading in 3874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07194831 = score(doc=3874,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.18903057 = fieldWeight in 3874, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3874)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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

Bibliography Section (Sektion Bibliographie) Die Sektion befasst sich mit Inhalt, Aufbau, Produktion, Verteilung und Erhaltung von bibliographischen Informationen, in erster Linie, aber nicht ausschließlich bezogen auf Nationalbibliographien. Sie fördert die "Universal Bibliographic Control (UBC)" durch die Verbreitung von Standards und praktischen Anwendungsbeispielen.
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.
Projekt "Mapping ISBDs to FRBR" Die Deutsche Bibliothek und die British Library haben im Rahmen ihrer jeweiligen Zuständigkeiten innerhalb von ICABS gemeinsam das Projekt "Mapping ISBDs to FRBR" finanziert. Beide Bibliotheken unterstützen damit die strategischen Ziele der IFLA-CDNL Allianz für bibliographische Standards. Die Deutsche Bibliothek ist innerhalb der Allianz verantwortlich für die Unterstützung der Pflege und Weiterentwicklung der ISBD, während die British Library für die Unterstützung von Pflege und Entwicklung der FRBR zuständig ist. Für die Durchführung des Projekts konnte Tom Delsey gewonnen werden, der federführender Autor der FRBR ist und Beiträge zu vielen verschiedenen Aspekten der ISBDs geliefert hat. Das Ergebnis seiner Arbeit "Mapping ISBD Elements to FRBR Entity Attributes and Relationships" steht im IFLAnet zur VerFügung (http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/pubs/ISBD-FRBR-mappingFinal.pdf).

0.053961232 = product of:
  0.21584493 = sum of:
    0.21584493 = weight(_text_:heading in 667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21584493 = score(doc=667,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.5670917 = fieldWeight in 667, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=667)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Forty years ago the ICCP in Paris laid the foundations of international co-operation in descriptive cataloging without explicitly speaking of authority control. Some of the factors in the evolution of authority control are the development of catalogs (from card catalog to local automation, to today's OPAC on the Web) and services provided by libraries (from individual service to local users to system networks, to the World Wide Web), as well as international agreements on cataloging (from Paris Principles to the UBC programme, to the report on Mandatory data elements for internationally shared resource authority records). This evolution progressed from the principle of uniform heading to the definition of authority entries and records, and from the responsibility of national bibliographic agencies for the form of the names of their own authors to be shared internationally to the concept of authorized equivalent heading. Some issues of the present state are the persisting differences among national rules and the aim of respecting both local culture and language and international readability.

0.05087514 = product of:
  0.20350055 = sum of:
    0.20350055 = weight(_text_:heading in 5583) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20350055 = score(doc=5583,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.5346592 = fieldWeight in 5583, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5583)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper presents an account of the development of music classifications, cataloguing codes, and subject heading lists in the United States. It also discusses pertinent activities within the Music Library Association, particularly the efforts of Eva Judd O'Meara, music librarian at Yale University from 1924 to 1952.

0.05087514 = product of:
  0.20350055 = sum of:
    0.20350055 = weight(_text_:heading in 5593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20350055 = score(doc=5593,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.5346592 = fieldWeight in 5593, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5593)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper presents an account of the development of music classifications, cataloguing codes, and subject heading lists in the United States. It also discusses pertinent activities within the Music Library Association, particularly the efforts of Eva Judd O'Meara, music librarian at Yale University from 1924 to 1952.

0.05087514 = product of:
  0.20350055 = sum of:
    0.20350055 = weight(_text_:heading in 4053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20350055 = score(doc=4053,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.5346592 = fieldWeight in 4053, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, 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

0.05087514 = product of:
  0.20350055 = sum of:
    0.20350055 = weight(_text_:heading in 168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20350055 = score(doc=168,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.5346592 = fieldWeight in 168, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=168)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

A survey of 261 libraries was undertaken to determine the level of use of and duties performed by student assistants in monographic cataloging operations. Ninety-five of 142 responding libraries (64.1 percent) indicate that they use student assistants for some type of monographic cataloging tasks. These tasks are downloading of bibliographic and authority records, monographic cataloging, classification, subject heading authority control, holdings, database maintenance, and editing of 246 or 505 MARC tags. Some respondents expressed reluctance to use student assistants for higher-level cataloging tasks.

0.05087514 = product of:
  0.20350055 = sum of:
    0.20350055 = weight(_text_:heading in 466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20350055 = score(doc=466,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.5346592 = fieldWeight in 466, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=466)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper discusses some common problems which catalogers of Slavic materials may encounter in establishing Slavic headings under AACR2. Three categories of headings have been selected: geographical, corporate and personal names concerned with the Soviet Union. Emphasis is placed upon cases where a cataloger may apply the rules correctly, but still establish an incorrect heading. Sources of these types of problems are identified and suggestions are made for dealing with them.

0.05087514 = product of:
  0.20350055 = sum of:
    0.20350055 = weight(_text_:heading in 3014) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20350055 = score(doc=3014,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.5346592 = fieldWeight in 3014, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3014)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Cataloging practices for video games have been in flux since the late 1970s, often lagging behind technological developments. This article describes the history of descriptive cataloging practices and MARC coding for video games. Also discussed are the special problems presented by Library of Congress subject heading and uniform title practice, which were developed for book cataloging rather than for the cataloging of video games themselves.

0.044515748 = product of:
  0.17806299 = sum of:
    0.17806299 = weight(_text_:heading in 941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17806299 = score(doc=941,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 941, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=941)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Authority controls can be used somewhat differently in archive management from the way they are used in bibliographic management. This difference is formalised in the 1994 draft International Standard Archival Authority Rules for Coporate Bodies, Persons and Families, or ISAAR(CPF), now available to the archival profession for examining andtesting. Identifies 2 distict purposes for authority control in archives work: to establish a standard form for the heading of an authority record; and to provide a structure for separating contextual (provenance) descriptions from content descriptions. Illustrates how ISAAR(CPF) seeks to fulfil both these purposes, providing an example of family authority entry

0.044515748 = product of:
  0.17806299 = sum of:
    0.17806299 = weight(_text_:heading in 4018) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17806299 = score(doc=4018,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 4018, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4018)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Surveys the status of catalguing practice in university libraries in 3 Asian developing countries, Pakistan, Malaysia, and Saudia Arabia. Examines the extent of the usage of international cataloguing tools such as cataloguing codes (AACR, ISBD), classification schemes (DDC, LCC) and subject heading lists (Sears, LCSH). Results indicate that there is an overall uniformity in the use of such tools, with a trend towards automation of cataloguing services with more access points for catalogue searching. Online catalogues are also replacing all traditional catalogue forms (card, printed, and microform). Findings show that, in using information technology in technical services, Malaysian university libraries are more advanced than those of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia

0.044515748 = product of:
  0.17806299 = sum of:
    0.17806299 = weight(_text_:heading in 470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17806299 = score(doc=470,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 470, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=470)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Cataloging works whose authorship is unclear or whose authenticity is in question is a long-standing issue that presents a unique challenge to the cataloger. AACR2R provides detailed guidance for determining the main entry heading, and the Subject Cataloging Manual includes instructions for the use of subdivisions; however, they are of limited assistance when dealing with ambiguous works. This article looks at some recent works that have generated controversy in their respective disciplines, and discusses the ideological and ethical implications of cataloging decisions made for them. Suggestions for cataloging these uncommon but vexing works include using notes that reflect the principles stated in the "Library Bill of Rights," and rethinking our use of reference sources.

0.044515748 = product of:
  0.17806299 = sum of:
    0.17806299 = weight(_text_:heading in 849) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17806299 = score(doc=849,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 849, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=849)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The paper highlights key aspects of the FRBR and FRANAR models that will need to be re-examined as part of a more intensive analysis of subject access, and suggests ways of approaching the refinement and extension of the models. Questions are raised about the current scope of coverage represented by the entities defined in the models, the need to define additional entity attributes, and the representation of both the semantic and syntactic relationships reflected in thesauri, subject heading lists, classification schemes, and indexing strings.

0.044515748 = product of:
  0.17806299 = sum of:
    0.17806299 = weight(_text_:heading in 533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17806299 = score(doc=533,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 533, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=533)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

As an illustration of the general concern about how bibliographic records for graphic materials can be integrated most effectively with records for works in other media, this article presents problems associated with applying existing AACR2 guidelines for choice of entry. Characteristics of original items and historical collections of pictures, the role of corporate bodies in creating such materials, and the degree to which AACR2 provisions for entry under the heading for a corporate body accommodate these features are examined. Recommendations regarding extending AACR2 Rule 21.1B2 and, more generally, regarding the need to examine the meaning and objectives of integrating bibliographic records for various media and actors affecting this process, are made.

0.044515748 = product of:
  0.17806299 = sum of:
    0.17806299 = weight(_text_:heading in 881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17806299 = score(doc=881,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 881, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=881)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Explores the confusion between main entry and main entry heading and attempts to finally lay the ghost to rest by shifting the emphasis onto the problem of work authority - the problem with which the theory of main entry is actually concerned. Concentrating on the second function of the catalogue as defined in the "Paris principles" of 1961, the paper examines various contributions on main entry including those delivered at the Toronto conference on AACR in 1997. Proposes the establishment of a global work authority file in which each individual work is primarily identified by a modified version of the uniform title, a departure which would restore the title (as opposed to the author) as principal identifier of the work.

0.044515748 = product of:
  0.17806299 = sum of:
    0.17806299 = weight(_text_:heading in 1799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17806299 = score(doc=1799,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 1799, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1799)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In current cataloging practice, the identification of an item as a member of a particular work set is accomplished by assigning a main entry heading, or main entry citation, in the bibliographic record representing that item. The main entry citation is normally comprised of a primary author name and the uniform title associated with the work. However, the quality of bibliographic records varies, and this means of identification is not universally used by catalogers. Thus, consistent identification and retrieval of records representing editions of works is not guaranteed. Research is reported that investigates the extent to which records that are members of a particular work set may be automatically identified as such.

0.044515748 = product of:
  0.17806299 = sum of:
    0.17806299 = weight(_text_:heading in 3599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17806299 = score(doc=3599,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 3599, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3599)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The US cataloging community is an interorganizational network with the Library of Congress (LC) as the lead organization, which reserves to itself the power to shape cataloging rules. Peripheral members of the network who are interested in modifying changes to the rules or to the network can use various strategies for organizational change that incorporate building ties to the decision-makers located at the hub of the network. The story of William E. Studwell's campaign for a subject heading code illustrates how some traditional scholarly methods of urging change-papers and presentations-are insufficient to achieve reform in an interorganizational network, absent strategies to build alliances with the decision makers.

0.044515748 = product of:
  0.17806299 = sum of:
    0.17806299 = weight(_text_:heading in 2181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17806299 = score(doc=2181,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 2181, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2181)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article discusses the practical application of faceted vocabularies to the cataloging of textbooks. Consistent application of faceted vocabularies, specifically Library of Congress Genre/Form Terms for Library and Archival Materials (LCGFT) and Library of Congress Demographic Group Terms (LCDGT), would enhance the discovery of these resources. Alternatives to special cases in Subject Heading Manual H 2187 are proposed. A case study demonstrating the application of LCDGT is provided. Figures illustrate the results of the proposed best practices. The article includes four tables that are designed to streamline term assignments. Consistent cataloging of genre and audience prepares legacy records for future automated enhancement.