共查询到19条相似文献，搜索用时 750 毫秒
1.
书次号统一与否不影响文献资源共建共享——对《对书次号研究的看法》的质疑 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
书次号是各馆区分同类异种图书的次序号,只有特殊性没有普遍性,因而无需统一每种书的书次号;书次号方案与书次号的选取是分离的,即统一书次号方案是一回事,书次号的编码又是另一回事,统一书次号应理解为统一采用某种书次号作为排列同类书的依据,而不应理解为统一每种书的书次号. 相似文献
2.
书次号是各馆区分同类异种图书的次序号，只有特殊性没有普遍性，因而无需统一每种书的书次号；书次号方案与书次号的选取是分离的，即统一书次号方案是一回事，书次号的编码又是另一回事，统一书次号应理解为统一采用某种书次号作为排列同类书的依据，而不应理解为统一每种书的书次号。 相似文献
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
略论书次号的作用与编制要求 总被引：4，自引：0，他引：4
吴昌合 《大学图书情报学刊》2000,(2):39-40
论述了书次号的作用,编制书次号的要求,并以新的见解澄清对书次号认识的误区。 相似文献
8.
9.
本文就种次号和著者号各自的利弊,分析了在数据共享及集中编目条件下书次号是否应该统一。基于发挥二者的优势互补,为实现各馆的日常排架及日后的编目数据共享,提出今后在书次号的设置上应同时设置两种书次号:以种次号作为显性书次号适应对内排架,以著者号作为隐性书次号适应对外检索。 相似文献
10.
论书次号标准化 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
郝冬冬 《铁路高校图书情报工作研究》2002,(1):122-124
文章论述了书次号的涵义、作用及其演变，比较了现有各类型书次号的优劣，提出了如何实现书次号标准化的建议。 相似文献
11.
This investigation examined the effects of Internet book reviews on consumer purchase intention. The total number of reviews and their length, the number of negative book reviews, and the order in which reviews appear were found to significantly influence customers’ book purchase intention. These results can assist book retailers to better understand the effects of various attributes in consumers’ book purchase process, as well as to manage book reviews effectively. 相似文献
12.
[目的/意义]掌握我国高校图书馆开展读书会活动的现状,分析其发展模式及存在问题,探讨高校图书馆开展读书会活动的有效策略。[方法/过程]通过网络社交媒体调查读书会的规模和数量,结合搜索引擎、相关研究文献、现场观摩及访谈等方法,掌握我国高校图书馆读书会的发展现状。[结果/结论]台湾地区高校图书馆读书会规模可观,发展成熟,仅亚洲大学每学期登记的读书会小组就多达306个。从QQ等网络社交媒体观察,大陆地区高校图书馆读书会(书友会的)仅40余个,处于快速发展的起步阶段,还存在诸多不足。大陆地区高校图书馆应从建立激励机制、强化图书馆学会的引领作用、明确图书馆功能定位等方面着手,促进读书会活动更广泛地开展。 相似文献
13.
James Hartley 《Learned Publishing》2018,31(2):169-171
Key points
- The number of printed book reviews in the social sciences is currently declining.
- The number of online book reviews is currently increasing.
- There are ways of measuring the impact of book reviews so that they can be included in research assessment exercises.
14.
我国中文同类书排列书次号研究述评 总被引：5，自引：0，他引：5
In the last 40 years, more than 190 pieces of book-number research papers have been produced in China, and 25 types from 7 classes of schemes for working out book numbers were put forward. Since the August of 1990, the study of book number system has already brought into the limits of functions of the China National Technical Committee of Standardization for Information and Documentation (CNTCSID). The pressing matter of the moment is:strengthening the leadership, tackling this key problem with a collective effort,formulating as early as possible standards for appraising book numbers and finally,taking the Chinese phonetic alphabets of book number searching mixed with two or three-figure numbers of the author number as the way forward for book number system in China. 相似文献
15.
中国的藏书与知识传承总是密切相关,是历代学者文人的读书治学之本。知识结构的变化反映在私人藏书结构上便是藏书内容的变化。民国时期,与前代相比,是一个藏书家逐步走向衰落,而藏书阶层进一步下落的时代。这期间藏书群体逐步延展到社会中有一定阅读能力和购买能力的众多职业阶层中。传统意义上那种以收藏数量众多、书籍质量高而见长,且带有一定研究性质的藏书家在逐步衰落。 相似文献
16.
李万健 《图书馆工作与研究》2010,(1)
清代是我国私家藏书业的鼎盛时期.其时藏书家人数众多,分布地域广;其藏书丰富,收书质量高;藏书家中多学问家,学术贡献大;他们还编刊图书、流布典籍、传播学术,并对近代新式图书馆的诞生作出了突出贡献.清代私家藏书目录数量多、品类全,其发展催生了版本目录学,并把题跋目录、专科目录推向了成熟阶段. 相似文献
17.
Book editors in the social sciences and humanities: an analysis of publication and collaboration patterns of established researchers in Flanders 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 Book editors in the social sciences and humanities play an important role in their fields but little is known about their typical publication and collaboration patterns. To partially fill this gap, we compare Flemish editors and other researchers, in terms of career stage, productivity, publication types, publications with domestic and international collaboration as well as the number of (international or all) unique co‐authors, co‐editors and associated book chapter authors. The results show that editors are mostly established researchers, especially in the social sciences, produce more book chapters and monographs than do other researchers, and are more productive. Nevertheless, editors collaborate less than do other researchers, both in terms of publications and in number of co‐authors. Including book chapter authors in the editors' collaboration networks makes those networks substantially larger, demonstrating that editors do not mainly call upon authors from their existing collaboration network when choosing book chapter authors in the edited books. Finally, editors seem to co‐author with their book chapter authors slightly more often after the publication of the edited book than before. 相似文献
18.
19.
Online book reviews reflect readers’ attitudes and opinions and serve as a data source for book impact assessment. Most research has only focused on the number of ratings and reviews to assess the impact of books. However, it is necessary to more thoroughly explore online book reviews, to analyze the viewpoints and sentiments expressed in them and the identity and motivation of the reviewers in order to evaluate the value of different types of book reviews. In this study, we collect Goodreads reviews of books indexed by the Book Citation Index and consider them according to the following three aspects: the popularity of highly cited books in Goodreads, the influence of reviewer roles (of author, librarian, and ordinary user) on book reviews, and the emotions and opinions behind reviewers’ ratings. Results consider the number of books reviewed in different disciplines, the variations in ratings of highly cited and non-highly cited books, differences in book reviews given by the reviewer roles, and the way reviewers express their sentiments about the books. The study concludes that if online reviews are to be used as indicators of book impact assessment, key considerations should include the subject discipline, the reviewer's role, and the sentiment polarity. 相似文献