Search (82 results, page 3 of 5)

0.0029264777 = product of:
  0.008779433 = sum of:
    0.008779433 = weight(_text_:a in 852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008779433 = score(doc=852,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 852, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=852)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this article is to outline the approach taken to the reclassification of the library collection within a small multi-site college of higher education - whereby 160,000 volumes were converted from the BLISS system to the Dewey Decimal Classification system, over a period of 11 weeks during Summer 2004. Design/methodology/approach - An automated approach was taken whereby the Library Systems Supplier - Talis was commissioned to convert catalogue records using a batch process. Risk analysis and critical path analysis were used as tools to keep the project on schedule and provide quality control. Findings - An automated approach allowed the project to be completed on time, within budget and with minimal disruption to services. Project planning was crucial to the success of the project. This included mapping BLISS to Dewey numbers, recruitment of a student team, management of work packages and ensuring continuity of the Library Service during the project. Practical implications - Institutional support for the project was secured because of its relevance to the College's corporate agenda and the promise of a wider impact that the project would have in terms of modernisation of the library service. Originality/value - Despite the apparent lack of current articles on re-classification, many libraries are still grappling with ongoing retrospective cataloguing projects. This case study demonstrates how one institution approached the problem and demonstrates that an automated approach can yield benefits. It will be of use to other libraries thinking of, or involved with, similar conversions. The partnership role of the Library Management System Supplier is also highlighted.

Type

a

0.0027093915 = product of:
  0.008128175 = sum of:
    0.008128175 = weight(_text_:a in 5066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008128175 = score(doc=5066,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 5066, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5066)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article examines changing views on "systematic" or classified shelf-arrangement in German library science from Kayser's 1790 work Ueber die Manipulation bey der Einrichtung einer Bibliothek to the 1914 Versammlung deutscher Bibliothekare in Leipzig, at which Georg Leyh delivered the seminal paper, "Systematische oder mechanische Aufstellung?" Systematic arrangement was, with few exceptions, held up as an ideal throughout the nineteenth century; but by 1914 it could be agreed to belong to a past era in which, in the words of Leyh, libraries ran as a "Kleinbetrieb" [small business] (Leyh 1913, 100, "Das Dogma von der systematischen Aufstellung II-IV." Zentralblatt für Bibliothekswesen 30:97-135). In particular, this article seeks to explore how changing views on the ideal of systematic shelf-arrangement in German library science during this period reflected evolving conceptions of librarianship. For nineteenth-century writers such as Ebert, Molbech, and Petzholdt, systematic classification and arrangement had meaning against the backdrop of an encyclopedic tradition within which libraries and librarians played an important role in organizing and presenting a rational overview of the universe of knowledge - an overview that was to be both physical and intellectual. The waning of the ideal of systematic arrangement at the turn of the twentieth century was associated with a sense of loss, as an intellectual or "scholarly" tradition of librarianship was seen to give way to more utilitarian and "bureaucratic" expectations. The changing fortunes of the ideal of systematic arrangement in German library science between 1790 and 1914 may be seen to illustrate how progress and loss are often inextricably linked in the history of libraries and librarianship

Type

a

0.002682161 = product of:
  0.008046483 = sum of:
    0.008046483 = weight(_text_:a in 510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008046483 = score(doc=510,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 510, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=510)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Library patrons have innate expectations about how documents should be arranged. Useful classification schemes are those which conform to these expectations and are thereby psychologically comfortable. All schemes necessarily deviate from these expectations, but not to the same degree. The greater the divergence from this mental standard with a scheme, the greater the psychological discomfort the patron will experience and the less useful the patron will find it. Using as an example the discipline of anthropology, this article develops a measure of the deviation of library classifications from collocation in mental space

Type

a

0.002654651 = product of:
  0.007963953 = sum of:
    0.007963953 = weight(_text_:a in 3274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007963953 = score(doc=3274,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3274, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3274)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In the late seventies, I was asked to work on classifying our Philosophy (and Psychology) collections, which were still located partly in the stacks and partly in the so-called Seminars-a traditional didactic and research structure of our School-where the books were mostly ordered by format or collection title. As often happens, my task was not completely free of restrictions: the general "new policy" of the entire Library was oriented toward accomplishing an open-shelf decimal classification, and the first step was to avoid an overly complicated schema, as this would probably have rendered more difficult the task of the end users, that is, our students but mainly our teaching staff. At the Scuola Normale Superiore, where historicism has always had an illustrious though somewhat cumbersome tradition (I quote only two philosophers and/or historians of Philosophy: Giovanni Gentile and Eugenio Garin), ordering the Philosophy collection- with its divisions, topics, geographical notations, chronological tables et similia-strictly by the Dewey decimal system might have been unthinkable. A second requirement was to designate a main location to the large collection of the often "complete works" of the philosophical Tradition. This way, the ideal Reader, foreseen to linger for hours in the newly restored library building of the Palazzo della Gherardesca, could easily access the reservoir of the great texts, which were to be followed on the shelves by the secondary literature ad auctorem. All in all, the implicit message to our students and scholars was to be the virtuous necessity of finding, ready on the shelves, the substantial core of the textual Tradition.
Arranged only in alphabetic order without any chronological partition (with the Cutter numbers as additional support), the Authors were meant to constitute (an actually are) the main section of our Philosophy collection. However, there was a further, even more challenging exception: the Greek and Latin Classics had to be "attracted" by the underlying Philology Seminar, where a formidable collection that is constantly enriched by donors and former professors of the Scuola Normale, from Giorgio Pasquali to Arnaldo Momigliano, had to embody the Ancient Philosophy as a tribute to the German traditional unity of the Antike. Therefore, in our library, medieval philosophy is arranged as a new Beginning, perhaps in consolatory and coherent balance with the spectacular structure of the town, which can be admired from the windows of the magnificent building where we are housed, including Count Ugolino's tower!

Type

a

0.002654651 = product of:
  0.007963953 = sum of:
    0.007963953 = weight(_text_:a in 565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007963953 = score(doc=565,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 565, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=565)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Type

a

0.002654651 = product of:
  0.007963953 = sum of:
    0.007963953 = weight(_text_:a in 4136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007963953 = score(doc=4136,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 4136, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4136)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Type

a

0.002654651 = product of:
  0.007963953 = sum of:
    0.007963953 = weight(_text_:a in 4631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007963953 = score(doc=4631,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 4631, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4631)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Location

A

0.0025028288 = product of:
  0.0075084865 = sum of:
    0.0075084865 = weight(_text_:a in 4863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0075084865 = score(doc=4863,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 4863, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4863)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The failure of children (or adults) to find items on the shelf, after locating the item in the catalogue, may be due to spatial confusion. Describes a field study designed to test the possibility that spatial skills are related to subjects' speed and directness in retrieving books from the stacks of an unfamiliar library

Type

a

0.0025028288 = product of:
  0.0075084865 = sum of:
    0.0075084865 = weight(_text_:a in 4394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0075084865 = score(doc=4394,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 4394, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4394)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Discusses the number of actions (or time) needed to organize library shelves. Studies 2 types pf problem: organizing a library shelf out of an unordered pile of books, and putting an existing shelf of books in the rough order. Uses results from information theory as well as from rank order statistics (runs). Draws conclusions about the advised frequency with which these actions should be undertaken

Type

a

0.0025028288 = product of:
  0.0075084865 = sum of:
    0.0075084865 = weight(_text_:a in 4659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0075084865 = score(doc=4659,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 4659, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4659)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Übers. des Titels: SISO is unable to accomodate the new media: a catagory subdivision for digital media

Type

a

0.0025028288 = product of:
  0.0075084865 = sum of:
    0.0075084865 = weight(_text_:a in 1774) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0075084865 = score(doc=1774,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 1774, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1774)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: ASTIN, J.: Cheshire: Alternative arrangement and beyond; READER, D.: User orientation in a Hertfordshire branch; CHANDLER, D.: Self-service-libraries: providing for the smaller community in Cambridgeshire; BETTS, D.: Reader interest categories in Surrey; DONBROSKI, L.: Categorisation at East Sussex County Library; McCARTHY, A.: Burning issues: stock appeal in Sunderland; MORSON, I. u. M. PERRY: Two-tier and total: stock arrangement in Brent

0.0025028288 = product of:
  0.0075084865 = sum of:
    0.0075084865 = weight(_text_:a in 3271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0075084865 = score(doc=3271,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 3271, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3271)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The ongoing project to revise the arrangement of the open shelves library collections occasioned a historiographic account of the implementation phases of the Library of Congress Classification (LCC), subclasses B-BJ - Philosophy and Psychology, at the Library of the Department of Philosophy of the University of Padua (Italy). The schema was adopted as a collection shelving and location device since the Library institution in 1997. The LCC international acknowledgement and the neutral framework of the schema have undoubtedly played a role of driving factors at the first stage of the selection process. However, the implementation of the classification scheme had to consider critical issues like the shortage of the library area, the selection criteria of the appropriate bibliographic material, as well as the effort to settle and tailor the original schema to the specific needs of the library collections and its end-users. The purpose of this paper is twofold: from one hand, we aim to examine in detail each stage of the implementation project in order to provide a preliminary impact evaluation of the classification schema both on the collections management and development and on the research practices of the local users community; from the other, we intend to highlight the principal factors that have implied a sort of declassification process of the system itself. In conclusion, we argue that the declassification of library collections can be read, from a bottom-up perspective, as index of vitality of the collections themselves, as well as a valuable basis for planning the next steps of the Library project.

Type

a

0.002212209 = product of:
  0.0066366266 = sum of:
    0.0066366266 = weight(_text_:a in 4898) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0066366266 = score(doc=4898,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4898, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4898)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Type

a

0.0021899752 = product of:
  0.0065699257 = sum of:
    0.0065699257 = weight(_text_:a in 1745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0065699257 = score(doc=1745,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 1745, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1745)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Contribution to a special issue devoted to papers read at the 1996 Electronic Access to Fiction research seminar at Copenhagen, Denmark

Type

a

0.0021899752 = product of:
  0.0065699257 = sum of:
    0.0065699257 = weight(_text_:a in 2473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0065699257 = score(doc=2473,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 2473, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2473)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Of the many shelf arrangement systems available for sound recordings there are two main types: those that classify and those that do not. To determine how libraries are arranging their sound recording collections today, a questionnaire was sent to 123 academic music libraries with collections of 5.000 or more sound recordings. Although LCC is used in 78% of the libraries of the libraries for books and in 74% of the libraries for scores, it is used in only 12% of the libraries for sound recordings. Accession number is the clear choice of academic music libraries for the shelving of sound recordings with 66% of the libraries surveyed using it

Type

a

0.0021899752 = product of:
  0.0065699257 = sum of:
    0.0065699257 = weight(_text_:a in 1973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0065699257 = score(doc=1973,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 1973, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1973)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In the recent years, several libraries in the United States have been experimenting with Book Industry Standards and Communications (BISAC), the classification system of the book industry, as an alternative to the Dewey Decimal Classification. Although rarely discussed, these cases of implementation of BISAC arguably resemble other past cases of replacement of traditional classifications that received the name of reader-interest classifications. In this article, a comparison of the BISAC cases to the previous cases of reader-interest classifications is taken in order to determine if the current application of BISAC to libraries is susceptible to the same problems, dangers, and ends as occurred in the past.

Type

a

0.0019158293 = product of:
  0.005747488 = sum of:
    0.005747488 = weight(_text_:a in 3270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005747488 = score(doc=3270,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.11032722 = fieldWeight in 3270, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3270)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Philosophy Library at the University of Milan was born in the fifties by the merger of the two Institutes of Philosophy and the History of Philosophy. Once the restoration had been completed, it was necessary to devise a suitable classification system in order to arrange the books and to meet the new research needs of the Institutes. The project was untrusted to Prof. Corrado Mangione and Prof. Maria Assunta del Torre, with the theoretical contribution of Giuliana Sapori, chief Director of Central Library of the Faculty of Laws and Humanities. The model had been conceived as completely anew, without any reference toother existing classification systems. The inspiring principles were from one hand the choice for an open shelving system, from the other one the idea that the orientation criteria and the book search had to be user-friendly for everyone. This paper provides an in-depth analysis of the making-up of the call number as applied to each section of the collection, and how the scheme has been developed over the past fifty years. Points of strenght and weakness of the scheme are also discussed at the light of the technological innovations which have gradually affected the whole of the library activities, notably with the introduction of the electronic catalogue. The original classification scheme has maintened its coherence and functionality over time, in spite of the expansion of the collection and the automation of all stages of the classification process. This is the main reason to keep using it in the future.

Type

a

0.0018771215 = product of:
  0.0056313644 = sum of:
    0.0056313644 = weight(_text_:a in 3081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0056313644 = score(doc=3081,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 3081, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3081)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

With more than a million books published each year, thousands of books will be cataloged and shelved in libraries. Assigning book numbers efficiently and balancing the distribution of main entries over the LC Cutter Table entries have become critical issues for shelving later entries in libraries using the Library of Congress Classification (LCC) system. This paper aims to explore and discuss the problems in assigning book numbers (Cutter numbers) to printed materials under the LCC System. The existing problems have blocked or invaded the usage of some numbers and letters ruled by the LC Cutter Table. The reason is either not following the LC Cutter Table well, or confusion in using the Table. Directly downloading the LC record to the local database adds more questions to the issue.

Type

a

0.0018771215 = product of:
  0.0056313644 = sum of:
    0.0056313644 = weight(_text_:a in 2184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0056313644 = score(doc=2184,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 2184, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2184)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Location

A

Type

a

0.0018771215 = product of:
  0.0056313644 = sum of:
    0.0056313644 = weight(_text_:a in 4378) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0056313644 = score(doc=4378,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 4378, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4378)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Location

A

Type

a