從使用者觀點探討書目紀錄以MARC、DC、MODS描述與加值之比較研究

A Comparative Study of Bibliographic Records Described and Value-Added with MARC, DC, and MODS-From Users' Viewpoints

10.6120/JoEMLS.2014.513/0607.RS.AM

張慧銖(Huei-Chu Chang)

後設資料物件描述綱要 ； 都柏林核心集 ； 書目加值 ； 後設資料互通 ； MODS ； DC ； Value-added bibliographic records ； Metadata interoperability

教育資料與圖書館學

51卷3期（2014 / 04 / 01）

365-389 - 22

繁體中文

本研究之目的為瞭解使用者查詢書目的核心元素，其對以不同後設資料描述同一資源和在書目紀錄頁面加值之看法。研究對象以圖資所及農資學院學生共14位為樣本。採用實驗、觀察及訪談法進行，將書目紀錄以MARC、DC及MODS格式呈現，請使用者進行比較以瞭解其觀點；最後詢問使用者對單有書目紀錄和書目紀錄整合數位典藏與機構典藏資源之檢索結果滿意度。研究結果發現多數使用者滿意目前圖書館所提供的書目資料，但希望能再提供資源的內容簡介；超過半數的使用者偏好以MARC為基礎的書目呈現，大都認同書目紀錄加入數位典藏及機構典藏資料之加值是有幫助的。研究建議圖書館若能將書目紀錄加值應可讓使用者的閱讀範圍擴大，同時增加資源能見度。

The purpose of this study is to understand which bibliographic data are the core elements of the user's queries? What users' viewpoints about resource descriptions using different metadata standards? What kinds of value-added items are the users' favorite when they conduct a bibliographic search? What are users' viewpoints about bibliographic records integrated with the Digital Archival and Institutional Repository resources through metadata interoperability methods? This research adopted experiments, observation and interviews. The sample subjects are drawn from 14 students of The Graduate Institute of Library and Information Science and College of Agriculture and Natural Resources. First of all, the researcher displayed the bibliographic records using original MARC from the library. Secondly, users compared the images of OPAC from the library with the format of DC and MODS transformed through the MarcEdit software. Additionally, the researcher conducted interviews to understand users' viewpoints about using three metadata schemas to describe the same book. Finally, the researcher asked the degree of users' satisfaction about using bibliographic records alone and bibliographic records integrated with the Digital Archival and Institutional Repository resources. The findings suggest that libraries could provide more value-added and comprehensive services of bibliographic records and information retrieval, in order for all kinds of resources to be fully utilized, which helps to meet the users' information needs.

1. 柯皓仁(2012)。資源探索服務之功能評估指標。2012 電子資訊資源與學術聯盟國際研討會，台北市:
   連結：
2. 張慧銖(2010)。書目紀錄加值對目錄使用者辨識與選擇行為影響之研究。圖書資訊學研究，5(1)，1-22。
   連結：
3. 中華資訊素養學會（2013）。資源查詢的新利器：資源探索服務。檢索自http://www.cila.org.tw/?p=2336
4. Baca, M.,O'Keefe, E.(2009).Sharing standards and expertise in the early 21stcentury: Moving toward a collaborative, "cross-community" model for metadata creation.International Cataloguing and Bibliographic Control,38(4),59-67.
5. Birrell, D.,Dunsire, G.,Menzies, K.(2009).,Scotland, UK:University of Strathclyde.
6. Caplan, P.,Haas, S.(2004).Metadata rematrixed: Merging museum and library boundaries.Library Hi Tech,22(3),263-269.
7. Gross, J.,Sheridan, L.(2011).Web scale discovery: The user experience.New Library World,112(5/6),236-247.
8. Hessel, H.,Fransen, J.(2012).Resource discovery: Comparative survey results on two catalog interfaces.Information Technology and Libraries,31(2),21-44.
9. Hofmann, M. A.,Yang, S. Q.(2012)."Discovering" what's changed: A revisit of the OPACs of 260 academic libraries.Library Hi Tech,30(2),253-274.
10. Maurer, M. B.,Gammon, J. A.,Pollock, B. M.(2013).Developing best practices for technical services cross-institutional collaboration.Cataloging & Classification Quarterly,51(1/2/3),179-193.
11. Menzies, K.,Birrell, D.,Dunsire, G.(2011).An investigation of information systems interoperability in UK universities: Findings and recommendations.New Review of Information Networking,16(2),92-140.
12. Missingham, R.(2004).Reengineering a national resource discovery service: MODS down under.D-Lib Magazine,10(9)
13. National Information Standards Organization(2007).Expanding our reach: NISO moves information standards forward: Annual reports.Baltimore, MD:Author.
14. Schultz-Jones, B.,Snow, K.,Miksa, S.,Hasenyager, R. L., Jr.(2012).Historical and current implications of cataloguing quality for next-generation catalogues.Library Trends,61(1),49-82.
15. Taheri, S. M.,Hariri, N.(2012).A comparative study on the indexing and ranking of the content objects including the MARCXML and Dublin Core's metadata elements by general search engines.The Electronic Library,30(4),480-491.
16. Walsh, M. P.(2011).Repurposing MARC metadata for an institutional repository: Working with special collections and university press monographs.Library Resources & Technical Services,55(1),33-44.
17. Weare, W. H., Jr.,Toms, S.,Breeding, M.(2011).Moving forward: The next-generation catalog and the new discovery tools.Library Media Connection,30(3),54-57.
18. 張慧銖(2011)。圖書館電子資源組織：從書架到網路。新北市:華藝數位。