Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.11155634 = product of:
  0.1673345 = sum of:
    0.15136406 = weight(_text_:20th in 825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15136406 = score(doc=825,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.30845094 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.345029 = idf(docFreq=210, maxDocs=44218)
          0.048613008 = queryNorm
        0.49072328 = fieldWeight in 825, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.345029 = idf(docFreq=210, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=825)
    0.015970435 = product of:
      0.047911305 = sum of:
        0.047911305 = weight(_text_:k in 825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047911305 = score(doc=825,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17353764 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048613008 = queryNorm
            0.27608594 = fieldWeight in 825, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=825)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

To classify is to put things in meaningful groups, but the criteria for doing so can be problematic. Study of evolution of classification includes ontogenetic analysis of change in classification over time. We present an empirical analysis of the UDC over the entire period of its development. We demonstrate stability in main classes, with major change driven by 20th century scientific developments. But we also demonstrate a vast increase in the complexity of auxiliaries. This study illustrates an alternative to Tennis scheme-versioning method.

0.07968309 = product of:
  0.11952463 = sum of:
    0.10811718 = weight(_text_:20th in 2152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10811718 = score(doc=2152,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.30845094 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.345029 = idf(docFreq=210, maxDocs=44218)
          0.048613008 = queryNorm
        0.35051662 = fieldWeight in 2152, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.345029 = idf(docFreq=210, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2152)
    0.011407453 = product of:
      0.034222357 = sum of:
        0.034222357 = weight(_text_:k in 2152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034222357 = score(doc=2152,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17353764 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048613008 = queryNorm
            0.19720423 = fieldWeight in 2152, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2152)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The decimal system is one system of a number of possible systems of ordering - and a very symbolic also. The ordering in ten chapters, themes, numbers, etc. you can find often in history. Indeed Dewey is not the genius-founder of decimal classification (against a number of authors)! For ordering and structuring separate schemes within a classification DDC creates a number of important negative solutions, e.g. in the main classes the 'lost' of physics and of medicine as special schemes: Nearly a catastrophe in the times of STM! And against an enormous tradition like Leibniz 1646 - 1716) et alii! Compare Bliss: The Bliss-Classification gives space for 6 numbers »sciences« in a context of 26 classes. Therefore the result in short: DDC (and UDC of course!) are »flowers« of the past, of the first decades of century 20! As a fact the Decimal Classification within the tradition of Melvil Dewey is not a final work: See the increasing number of newly constructed decimal classifications during the years 80 and 90 of the 20th century! Nevertheless DDC is a very great (problem and) solution in its development, internationality, reception - and edge-stone for many thinkers and librarians throughout the world - and an important example for modern translational work! Magda Heiner-Freiling has given to us a great stone for the edifice of Modern DDC: Requiescat in pace!

Source

New pespectives on subject indexing and classification: essays in honour of Magda Heiner-Freiling. Red.: K. Knull-Schlomann, u.a

0.03603906 = product of:
  0.10811718 = sum of:
    0.10811718 = weight(_text_:20th in 141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10811718 = score(doc=141,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.30845094 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.345029 = idf(docFreq=210, maxDocs=44218)
          0.048613008 = queryNorm
        0.35051662 = fieldWeight in 141, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.345029 = idf(docFreq=210, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=141)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Outlines the bibliographic enterprise envisaged by Otlet and LaFontaine, which resulted in the UDC being developed in 1895, and the subsequent history of the scheme. Relationship with DDC from which it was derived deteriorated in the early 20th century and changes in funding, location, and editorship of Duyvis from 1929-59 had a profound effect on the scheme's development and management. Lloyd, Duyvis successor, reformed the revision structure, and further management changes from 1975 to the present day, culminated in the formation of the UDC Consortium in 1992. Notes the subsequent creation of a machine-readable Master Reference File and speedier revision procedures. Examines the scheme's structure, development, and influence on classification theory, problems caused by longevity and lack of standrad procedures, and highlights proposals for their reform to improve the scheme's suitability for an automated world. Explores research projects in 1960s which foreshadowed possibilities today, such as a complementary thesaurus and individualisation of single concepts notationally. Emphasizes the value of classification in a multilingual environment and outlines the future developments

0.0103385 = product of:
  0.031015499 = sum of:
    0.031015499 = product of:
      0.093046494 = sum of:
        0.093046494 = weight(_text_:29 in 1167) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.093046494 = score(doc=1167,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17100537 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048613008 = queryNorm
            0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 1167, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1167)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

DK-Mitteilungen. 29(1985) Nr.5, S.15-18

0.0036591066 = product of:
  0.010977319 = sum of:
    0.010977319 = product of:
      0.032931957 = sum of:
        0.032931957 = weight(_text_:22 in 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032931957 = score(doc=116,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17023447 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048613008 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 116, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=116)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

3. 3.2016 18:59:22