השוואת שיטות

	Name Authority Control Evaluation	Bibliographic Record Quality Analysis
תחום	Library Information Science	Library Information Science
משפחה	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
שנת המקור	2009	2018
הוגה השיטה	IFLA FRANAR (FRAD model); Elaine Svenonius	Philip Hider; Elaine Svenonius
סוג	Evaluation pipeline for name authority control quality	Evaluation pipeline for bibliographic record quality
מקור מכונן	IFLA Working Group on Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records (FRANAR). (2009). Functional Requirements for Authority Data: A Conceptual Model. The Hague: IFLA (rev. 2013).	Hider, P. (2018). Information Resource Description: Creating and Managing Metadata (2nd ed.). London: Facet Publishing. ISBN: 9781783302239
כינויים	Authority Control Assessment, Name Authority File Evaluation, Identity Disambiguation Evaluation, Authority Data Quality Evaluation	Catalogue Record Quality Analysis, MARC Record Quality Assessment, Bibliographic Data Quality Evaluation, Cataloguing Quality Analysis
קשורות	3	3
תקציר	Name authority control evaluation is the systematic assessment of how well a name authority file fulfils its core task: gathering everything by or about a given person, family, or corporate body under one controlled access point, while keeping distinct identities apart. The IFLA Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD) model supplies the conceptual yardstick, defining the entities authority data describes and the user tasks — find, identify, contextualize, and justify — that authority control must support. Elaine Svenonius's analysis of the cataloguing objectives explains why collocation and disambiguation are the heart of the matter. Evaluation samples access points, measures collocation (are all of an identity's works gathered?) and disambiguation (are unlike identities kept separate?), and audits the quality of the authority records themselves against FRAD's requirements.	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.