The purpose of authority control is to ensure consistency in representing a value - a name of a person, a place name, or a term or code representing a subject - in the elements used as access points in information retrieval. The primary purpose of this study is to produce a framework that will provide a clearly stated and commonly shared understanding of what the subject authority data/record/file aims to provide information about, and the expectation of what such data should achieve in terms of answering user needs.
| Members of the IFLA Working Group on the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records (FRSAR) |
|
1 | (2) |
|
|
|
3 | (2) |
|
|
|
5 | (6) |
|
|
|
5 | (1) |
|
|
|
6 | (1) |
|
|
|
7 | (1) |
|
|
|
8 | (1) |
|
2.5 Components of the Study |
|
|
9 | (2) |
|
|
|
11 | (6) |
|
3.1 Diagramming Conventions |
|
|
11 | (1) |
|
|
|
11 | (2) |
|
3.3 Choice of Terms for FRSAD Entities |
|
|
13 | (1) |
|
|
|
13 | (2) |
|
|
|
15 | (2) |
|
|
|
17 | (6) |
|
4.1 Attributes of a THEMA |
|
|
17 | (2) |
|
4.2 Attributes of a NOMEN |
|
|
19 | (4) |
|
|
|
23 | (8) |
|
5.1 WORK-to-THEMA Relationship |
|
|
23 | (1) |
|
5.2 THEMA-to-NOMEN Relationship |
|
|
23 | (1) |
|
5.3 THEMA-to-THEMA Relationships |
|
|
24 | (4) |
|
5.4 NOMEN-to-NOMEN Relationships |
|
|
28 | (3) |
|
|
|
31 | (6) |
|
|
|
31 | (1) |
|
|
|
32 | (1) |
|
6.3 Assessing Values Relative to User Tasks |
|
|
33 | (2) |
|
6.4 Mapping of Attributes, Relationships, and User Tasks |
|
|
35 | (2) |
|
|
|
37 | (2) |
|
Appendix A Modeling Aboutness |
|
|
39 | (6) |
|
A.1 Subject Relationship and Group 3 Entities Introduced in FRBR |
|
|
39 | (1) |
|
A.2 Possible Approaches to the Model of Aboutness |
|
|
40 | (5) |
|
Appendix B Relationship of FRSAD with FRBR and FRAD |
|
|
45 | (4) |
|
B.1 Relationship of FRSAD with FRBR |
|
|
45 | (1) |
|
B.2 Relationship of FRSAD with FRAD |
|
|
46 | (3) |
|
Appendix C FRSAD Model and Other Models |
|
|
49 | (4) |
|
C.1 The Importance of the THEMA-NOMEN Model |
|
|
49 | (1) |
|
C.2 Mapping the FRSAD Model to Other Models |
|
|
50 | (1) |
|
|
|
51 | (2) |
|
Appendix D Examples from Subject Authority Systems |
|
|
53 | (20) |
|
D.1 Existing Models of THEMA Types |
|
|
53 | (4) |
|
D.2 THEMA-THEMA Relationships presented in Subject Authority Data |
|
|
57 | (9) |
|
D.3 Same THEMA Represented by NOMENs from Different Schemes |
|
|
66 | (1) |
|
D.4 Examples of Display Records from Controlled Vocabularies or Subject Authority Files |
|
|
67 | (6) |
| References |
|
73 | |
Athena Salaba and Marcia Lei Zeng, Kent State University, Kent, USA and Maja umer, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Rohkem infot De Gruyter e-raamatute kohta