references

Return to XOBIS main page

References

Note:In XOBIS, these references would be mostly either compositional-compositional or compositional-organizational Relationships.

1. Extensible Markup Language (XML) http://www.w3.org/XML/

2. For cataloging context, cf.:Joint Steering Committee for Revision of the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/jsc/index.html and:Library of Congress.   Cataloging Policy & Support Office.   http://lcweb.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/   In other places, we refer cataloging rules generally and internationally, but have been influenced predominantly by the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (AACR2) and Library of Congress practice.

3.Library of Congress.Network Development and MARC Standards Office.MARC Standards.   http://www.loc.gov/marc/

4. Joint Meeting of MARBI/CC:DA.   2000. http://www.ala.org/alcts/organization/div/marbi/marbi-ccda.html

5. Miller, Dick R.XML and MARC: A Choice or Replacement?Presented at the MARBI/CC:DA Joint Meeting , American Library Association, Chicago, 2000. http://elane.stanford.edu/laneauth/ALAChicago2000.html

6. Lane Medical Library.Medlane Project.   http://medlane.stanford.edu/

7. National Library of Medicine (U.S.).NLM to Use XML and DTD for MEDLINE Data, Oct. 2000.   http://www.nlm.nih.gov/news/medlinedata.html   and the earlier announcement:   New Data Format and Distribution Media for Licensees of NLM Data, Nov. 19, 1999.http://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/xml_announce.html

8. National Library of Medicine (U.S.).Introduction to MeSH in XML Format, 2001.    http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/xmlmesh.html

9. Cover, Robin.National Library of Medicine (NLM) XML Data Formats, Mar. 7, 2001.http://xml.coverpages.org/nlmXML.html

10. Additional NLM Databases in XML Format (CCRIS, GENE-TOX, HSDB®, TOXLINE® Special, and ChemIDplus), 2001. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/license_announce/announce_aug_20.html

11. Library of Congress.Network Development and MARC Standards Office.MARC in XML and SGML, Aug. 6, 2002.http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/

12. Library of Congress.Network Development and MARC Standards Office.MODS:   Metadata Object Description Schema, Mar. 27, 2002.http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/

13. Library of Congress.Network Development and MARC Standards Office.MARC XML, MARC 21 XML Schema, Apr. 16, 2002.http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml//

14. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative.http://dublincore.org/

15. Editeur.   ONIX Product Information Standards.   http://www.editeur.org/onix.html

16. Virginia Polytechnic Institute.Digital Library Research Laboratory.Open Archives Initiative.MARC XML.   http://www.dlib.vt.edu/projects/OAi/marcxml/marcxml.html

17. Lam, K. T.Moving from MARC to XML, 1998.   http://ihome.ust.hk/~lblkt/xml/marc2xml.html

18. BiblioML.   http://www.culture.fr/BiblioML/

19. Carvalho, Joaquim de.XML and bibliographic data:   the TVS (Transport, Validation and Services) model, 2002.http://www.ifla.org/IV/ifla68/papers/075-095e.pdf

20. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions.   Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, Sept. 1997. http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr.htm

21. Joint Steering Committee for the Revision of Anglo-American Cataloging Rules.   The Logical Structure of the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 1998-1999. http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/jsc/docs.html

22. Delsey, Tom. Functional Analysis of the MARC 21 Bibliographic and Holdings Formats, Jan. 4, 2002. http://www.loc.gov/marc/marc-functional-analysis/home.html

23. Le Boeuf, Patrick. FRBR and further. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 2001; 32(4):15-52.

24. Program for Cooperative Cataloging.PCC Task Group on Name Versus Subject Authorities.   Final Report, Feb. 21, 2001.http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/archive/divworld.html

25. Ostrove, Geraldine E.Music Subject Cataloging and Form/Genre Implementation at the Library of Congress.   Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 2001; 32(2):91-106.

26. Health Education Assets Library.HEAL Standards and Documentation, 2002.http://www.healcentral.org/documents.htm

27. Visual Resources Association. VRA Core Categories, Version 3.0., Feb. 20, 2002. http://www.vraweb.org/vracore3.htm

28. Lane Medical Library.Website.   http://lane.stanford.edu/index.html

29. Miller, Dick R.Adding Luster to Librarianship: XML as an Enabling Technology, Jan. 2002.   http://elane.stanford.edu/laneauth/Luster.html

30. Miller, Dick R.Bibliographic access management at Lane Medical Library:fin de millennium experimentation and bruised-edge innovation.   Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 2000; 30(2/3):139-66.   Cf. p. 164.   http://xmlmarc.stanford.edu/dick.pdf

31. XOBIS Version 1.0a.2002.   http://laneweb.stanford.edu:2380/wiki/medlane/schema   [change when new site ready DM]

32. OASIS Technical Committee: RELAX NG, 2001- http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/relax-ng/

33. World Wide Web Consortium.XML Schema, 2000.   http://www.w3.org/XML/Schema

34. Clark, James. RELAX NG and W3C XML Schema, 2002. http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-use/mail-archive/msg00217.html

35. XMLMARC Version 2.0.2002.   http://laneweb.stanford.edu:2380/wiki/medlane/xmlmarc [change DM]

36. Clarke, Kevin S. Managing MARC with Open Source Software.LITA Guide 2002; 9(3):30-44

37. Clarke, Kevin S. "Updating MARC Records with XMLMARC."   In: Tennant, Roy, ed:   XML in Libraries: Case Studies of Practical Applications.   New York: Neil-Schuman, 2002.

38. Raymond, Eric S.The Cathedral and the Bazaar, 2000. http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/

39. Miller, Dick R.XML: Libraries' Strategic Opportunity.Library Journal NetConnect 2000 summer; 125(suppl):18-20,22.   http://xmlmarc.stanford.edu/LJ/

40. XOBIS Electronic Discussion. http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/medlane-schema

41. XML4Lib Electronic Discussion.http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/XML4Lib/

42. Institute of Museum and Library Services.http://www.imls.gov/

43.National Library of Medicine (U.S.).Unified Medical Language System (UMLS).http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/

44. Library of Congress.Network Development and MARC Standards Office.Alphabetical List of Ambiguous Headings.http://www.loc.gov/marc/ambiguous-headings.html

45. Wool, Gregory. Filing and Precoordination:How Subject Headings are Displayed in Online Catalogs and Why it Matters.   Cat Class Q 2000; 29(1/2):91-106.   Observes that postcoordination has become more widespread and entrenched.

46. OCLC Online Computer Library Center. Office of Research.   FAST: Faceted Application of Subject Terminology.   http://wcp.oclc.org/fast/   This regards LCSH.

47. Savage, Allan.Changes in MeSH Data Structure.NLM Tech Bull   2000 Mar/Apr; 313:e2 http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/techbull/ma00/ma00_mesh.html

48. Lane Medical Library.Community Information File.http://cifdb.stanford.edu   Despite the name, this database consists of enriched MARC authority records transformed daily into pseudo-MARC bibliographic records to make their content fully searchable for both staff and users.Textword is used as a category (form) to identify the subset of this file consisting of experimental word/phrase authority records.

49. Princeton University. Cognitive Science Laboratory. WordNet: A Lexical Database for the English Language.http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/~wn/

50. HyperDic (based on WordNet).http://www.hyperdic.net/

51. Lexical FreeNet Connected Thesaurus.http://www.lexfn.com/

52. WordSmyth:The Educational Dictionary-Thesaurus, 2000.http://www.wordsmyth.net/

53. National Library of Medicine (U.S.).Specialist Lexicon Fact Sheet, Feb. 14, 2001.http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/factsheets/umlslex.html

54. Unicode Home Page.http://www.unicode.org/

55. Kuhn, Markus.A Summary of the International Standard Date and Time. Notation, 1995, rev. 2001.   http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/iso-time.html   The standard itself from the International Organization for Standardization is referred to as ISO 8601:2000.

56. Bean, Carol A.; Green, Rebecca, editors. Relationships in the Organization of Knowledge. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.

57. Library of Congress.Thesaurus for Graphic Materials I: Subject Terms, 1995.http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/tgm1/   The indexing principles discussed are interesting, cf. especially:II.B. "Of" and "About", and:   II.D. Generic and Specific.   [shows the issues are coming up in grappling with problems]

58. MARC Code List for Relators, Sources, Descriptive Conventions.   Web Version November 28, 2001.   http://www.loc.gov/marc/relators/relahome.html

59. Tillett, Barbara B. Authority Control on the Web, Jan. 23, 2001. http://www.loc.gov/catdir/bibcontrol/tillett_paper.html

60. Smiraglia, Richard P., editor. Origins, Content, and Future of AACR2 Revised. Chicago and London: American Library Association, 1992.

61. Library of Congress.Cataloging Directorate. Bibliographic Control of Web Resources: A Library of Congress Action Plan, Revised July, 2002. http://www.loc.gov/catdir/bibcontrol/actionplan.html    Based on the invitational Bicentennial Conference on Bibliographic Control for the New Millennium held in 2002.

62. Heaney, Michael. Object-oriented cataloging. Information Technology and Libraries 1995 Sep; 14(3):135-53.

63.Ridley, Mark.Beyond MARC, 1997. http://collection.nlc-bnc.ca/100/200/300/jsc_aacr/beyond/r-beyond.htm

65. Library of Congress.METS Metadata Encoding & Transmission Standard. http://www.loc.gov/standards/mets/

66. Miller, Dick R.Maintaining Standards without Excessive Standardization, 1995.http://xmlmarc.stanford.edu/mla1995.html