ScholarGate
עוזר

השוואת שיטות

סקרו את השיטות שבחרתם זו לצד זו; שורות שבהן יש הבדל מודגשות.

Metadata Quality Assessment×Bibliographic Record Quality Analysis×
תחוםLibrary Information ScienceLibrary Information Science
משפחהProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
שנת המקור20042018
הוגה השיטהThomas Bruce & Diane Hillmann; Jung-ran Park & Yuji TosakaPhilip Hider; Elaine Svenonius
סוגMeasurement pipeline for metadata qualityEvaluation pipeline for bibliographic record quality
מקור מכונןBruce, T. R., & Hillmann, D. I. (2004). The Continuum of Metadata Quality: Defining, Expressing, Exploiting. In D. I. Hillmann & E. L. Westbrooks (Eds.), Metadata in Practice (pp. 238-256). Chicago: ALA. link ↗Hider, P. (2018). Information Resource Description: Creating and Managing Metadata (2nd ed.). London: Facet Publishing. ISBN: 9781783302239
כינוייםMetadata Quality Evaluation, Metadata Quality Measurement, Metadata Assessment, Digital Repository Metadata EvaluationCatalogue Record Quality Analysis, MARC Record Quality Assessment, Bibliographic Data Quality Evaluation, Cataloguing Quality Analysis
קשורות33
תקצירMetadata quality assessment is the systematic measurement of how good a collection's descriptive metadata is for its intended purposes. Thomas Bruce and Diane Hillmann's influential framework defined quality along a continuum of dimensions — completeness, accuracy, conformance to expectations, logical consistency and coherence, timeliness, accessibility, and provenance — and argued that quality must be defined relative to use, then expressed and exploited. Jung-ran Park and Yuji Tosaka surveyed how digital repositories operationalize the three most widely accepted criteria — accuracy, completeness, and consistency — into concrete control mechanisms. Assessment turns these dimensions into measurable indicators, scores records and collections against them, and produces diagnostics that pinpoint where metadata falls short, so that interoperability, discovery, and trust can be improved.Bibliographic record quality analysis evaluates the catalogue records that describe library resources — typically MARC or linked-data records built to standards such as RDA — to determine how well they serve their purpose. Philip Hider's account of information resource description frames quality in terms of accuracy, completeness, consistency, and conformance to cataloguing rules, while Elaine Svenonius's objectives of the catalogue — to find, identify, select, and obtain resources — supply the functional yardstick against which records are ultimately judged. The analysis samples records, scores them on each quality criterion, checks their encoding and content against the relevant standard, and asks whether they actually let users carry out the catalogue's core tasks. The result is evidence about where cataloguing is strong, where it fails, and what remediation or policy change is needed.
ScholarGateמערך נתונים
  1. v1
  2. 2 מקורות
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 מקורות
  3. PUBLISHED

מעבר לחיפוש הורדת מצגת

ScholarGateהשוואת שיטות: Metadata Quality Assessment · Bibliographic Record Quality Analysis. אוחזר בתאריך 2026-06-25 מתוך https://scholargate.app/he/compare