Search (1451 results, page 10 of 73)

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 3775) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=3775,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 3775, 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=3775)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Browse searching of online catalogs and electronic indexes is a popular means of retrieving information, but some subject heading lists are so extensive that browsing them can be difficult and time-consuming. This resaerch tested one way of presenting a browse interface to reduce the amount of scanning of subject headings required. It found that a hierarchical presentation of headings reduced the amount of scanning required by more than 50% without any reduction in the effectiveness of the search. Better browsable displays of this sort can improve the efficiency of searching but appear not to alter effectivenenss

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 4018) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=4018,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = 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

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 4735) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=4735,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 4735, 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=4735)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Contrasts the practice of 'classified' indexing (i.e. the arrangement of headings into a limited number of hierarchies) with 'specific' indexing (i.e. direct entry under the term chosen for the heading). Defines and gives examples of both practices and considers their application to law book indexing. There is a long tradition of compiling and publishing classified indexes in law books. Argues, however, that specific indexes are a far more effective finding aid and that readers wishing to make a 'classified' type of approach to a law book can usually do so by consulting the contents list or lists

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 6607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=6607,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 6607, 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=6607)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Many kinds of structure can be discerned in the headings and rules governing the Library of Congress Subject Headings. By addressing these structures at different levels, librarians can develop different approaches to the machine-assisted validation of subject headings, from the checking of individual words to the validation of complex forms of heading/subdivision compatibility. Using computer programs to assist with maintenance of subject headings is becoming increasingly necessary as technical services librarians strive to create consistent and useful patterns of subject collocation in library catalogs

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 2151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=2151,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 2151, 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=2151)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This chapter describes the expression of relationships in a traditional library subject heading system, Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH). Following an introductory section an the history and scope of LCSH, information is presented an its reference structure, documentation, and notation. The development and current use of references to express equivalence, hierarchical, and associative relationships are discussed. Other relational devices, such as scope notes and Library of Congress Classification numbers, are also covered. Changes to improve the reference structure of LCSH and facilitate its use in online catalogs are reviewed.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 5825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=5825,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 5825, 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=5825)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In line with the international flavour of the book, Patrice Landry looks at the multilingual problem. This chapter is mainly concerned with a review of MACS (Multilingual Access to Subjects); a project with the strategy of developing a Web-based link and search interface through which equivalents between three Subject Heading Languages can be created and maintained, and by which users can access online databases in the language of their choice. The three systems in the project are German, French and English language. With the dramatic spread of use of the Web, particularly in the Far East, such projects are going to be increasingly valuable and important.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=470,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = 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.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=497,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 497, 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=497)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The principle of specificity for subject headings provides a clear advantage to many researchers for the precision it brings to subject searching. However, for some researchers very specific subject headings hinder an efficient and comprehensive search. An appropriate broader heading, especially when made narrower in scope by the addition of subheadings, can benefit researchers by providing generic access to their topic. Assigning both specific and generic subject headings to a work would enhance the subject accessibility for the diverse approaches and research needs of different catalog users. However, it can be difficult for catalogers to assign broader terms consistently to different works and without consistency the gathering function of those terms may not be realized.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=659,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 659, 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=659)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This proposed new classification scheme is based on two main elements: hierarchism and binary theory. Hence, it is called Universal Binary Classification (UBC). Some advantages of this classification are highlighted including are subject heading development, construction of a thesaurus and all terms with meaningful features arranged in tabular form that can help researchers, through a semantic process, to find what they need. This classification scheme is fully consistent with the classification of knowledge. The classification of knowledge is also based on hierarchism and binary principle. Finally, a survey on randomly selected books in McLennan Library of McGill University is presented to compare the codes of this new classification with the currently employed Library of Congress Classification (LCC) numbers in the discipline of Library and Information Sciences.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=679,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 679, 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=679)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This presentation attempts to fit the subject contribution mechanism used in the Program for Cooperative Cataloging's SACO Program into the context of subject gateways. The discussion points to several subject gateways and concludes that there is no similarity between the two. Subject gateways are a mechanism for facilitating searching, while the SACO Program is a cooperative venture that provides a "gateway" for the development of LCSH (Library of Congress Subject Heading list) into an international authority file for subject headings.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=680,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 680, 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=680)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Shared authority files and cooperation in the development of national lists, both author and subject, have enabled libraries to share resources and improve access to their collections. As we move from national resource sharing to a more international approach, we face problems accessing catalogues in other languages. By creating links between existing subject heading languages (initially in French, German, and English), MACS (Multilingual Access to Subjects) allows users to carry out searches in major national library collections in Europe using subject headings in their own languages. An operational service will be available in 2004.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=760,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 760, 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=760)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Normalization rules are essential for interoperability between bibliographic systems. In the process of working with Name Authority Cooperative Program (NACO) authority files to match records with Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and developing the Faceted Application of Subject Terminology (FAST) subject heading schema, the authors found inconsistencies in independently created NACO normalization implementations. Investigating these, the authors found ambiguities in the NACO standard that need resolution, and came to conclusions on how the procedure could be simplified with little impact on matching headings. To encourage others to test their software for compliance with the current rules, the authors have established a Web site that has test files and interactive services showing their current implementation.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 849) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=849,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = 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.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=350,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 350, 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=350)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Moving to a fully faceted syntax would resolve three problems facing Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH): 1. Inconsistent syntax rules; 2. Inability to create headings that are coextensive with the topic of a work; and 3. Lack of effective displays for long lists of subdivisions under a single subject heading in OPACs and similar electronic displays. The authors advocate a fully faceted syntax using the facets of a modern faceted library classification (The Bliss Bibliographic Classification, 2d ed.). They demonstrate how this might be accomplished so as to integrate the new syntax with existing headings.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 451) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=451,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 451, 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=451)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Authority control is discussed from two viewpoints: The need for bibliographic records relating to a name to be brought together under one form of the name; and the need for cross references to direct a user to a heading from variant forms of the name. Data from two research projects that support the need for choosing one form of name are summarized. The author's study of user requests that resulted in no "hits" in an online catalog is described. Data are given to show that for only 6.4% of these requests would our current methods of cross referencing in authority records have been helpful, and that two system programs would have given much greater assistance.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=533,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = 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.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=665,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 665, 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=665)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Library of Congress Subject Headings scheme contains a system of free floating subdicisions under types of subject headings. To create an authority record for each actual use of each subdivision would cause a great deal of extra work and lead to an excessively large authority file. On the other hand, the use of subdivisions is a hindrance to automatic verification of headings, since there is usually no corresponding authority record to which a heading with subdivision can be matched. Describes a method of automatically pre comparing subject subdivisions with verifying lists and shows how precomparisons of subdivisions can be made automatically until, and if, the problem of free floating subdivisions in automated subject authority control is externally resolved.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=881,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = 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.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 1363) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=1363,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 1363, 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=1363)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Linking full-text proprietary databases with Google Scholar revealed three significant limitations in terms of precision (no subject heading search), transparency (no listing of information sources), and visibility (Google Scholar details are hard to find). Google Scholar is not a "one stop shopping" search engine that retrieves all relevant data from a library's licensed content. Despite these shortcomings, Google Scholar is a worthwhile search option for students, which may steer them away from Web resources, and towards the library's catalog and databases.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 1504) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=1504,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 1504, 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=1504)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article introduces the Simple Knowledge Organisation System (SKOS), a Semantic Web language for representing controlled structured vocabularies, including thesauri, classification schemes, subject heading systems and taxonomies. SKOS provides a framework for publishing thesauri, classification schemes, and subject indexes on the Web, and for applying these systems to resource collections that are part of the SemanticWeb. SemanticWeb applications may harvest and merge SKOS data, to integrate and enhances retrieval service across multiple collections (e.g. libraries). This article also describes some alternatives for integrating Semantic Web services based on the Resource Description Framework (RDF) and SKOS into a distributed enterprise architecture.