Search (50 results, page 2 of 3)

0.011485667 = product of:
  0.045942668 = sum of:
    0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 1033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045942668 = score(doc=1033,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 1033, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1033)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of library administration. 34(2001) nos.1/2, S.103-109

0.011485667 = product of:
  0.045942668 = sum of:
    0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 3789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045942668 = score(doc=3789,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 3789, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3789)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.011485667 = product of:
  0.045942668 = sum of:
    0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045942668 = score(doc=552,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 552, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=552)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The term 'the bibliographic paradigm' is used in the literature of library and information science, but is a very seldom term and is almost always negatively described. This paper reconsiders this concept. Method. The method is mainly 'analytical'. Empirical data concerning the current state of the UDC-classification system are also presented in order to illuminate the connection between theory and practice. Analysis. The bibliographic paradigm is understood as a perspective in library and information science focusing on documents and information resources, their description, organization, mediation and use. This perspective is examined as one among other metatheories of library and information science and its philosophical assumptions and implications are outlined. Results. The neglect and misunderstanding of 'the bibliographic paradigm' as well as the quality of the new UDC-classification indicate that both the metatheoretical discourses on library and information science and its concrete practice seem to be in a state of crisis.

0.011485667 = product of:
  0.045942668 = sum of:
    0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 4449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045942668 = score(doc=4449,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 4449, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4449)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This study explores, in 3 steps, how the 3 main library classification systems, the Library of Congress Classification, the Dewey Decimal Classification, and the Universal Decimal Classification, cover human knowledge. First, we mapped the knowledge covered by the 3 systems. We used the "10 Pillars of Knowledge: Map of Human Knowledge," which comprises 10 pillars, as an evaluative model. We mapped all the subject-based classes and subclasses that are part of the first 2 levels of the 3 hierarchical structures. Then, we zoomed into each of the 10 pillars and analyzed how the three systems cover the 10 knowledge domains. Finally, we focused on the 3 library systems. Based on the way each one of them covers the 10 knowledge domains, it is evident that they failed to adequately and systematically present contemporary human knowledge. They are unsystematic and biased, and, at the top 2 levels of the hierarchical structures, they are incomplete.

0.010828791 = product of:
  0.043315165 = sum of:
    0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 1152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043315165 = score(doc=1152,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 1152, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1152)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Seeking to document the extent to which libraries of four-year colleges and universities have adopted the LCC system, this study surveys the classification systems used by the libraries of 1.160 accredited four-year-colleges and universities. The LC system is presently being used by more than half of these libraries; however, throughout 1968-71 the "trend to LC" clearly lost momentum. Data are provided on the extent to which the Library of Congress and The DDC systems were used in 1967 and 1971 by libraries of various sizes and categories

Source

Library resources and technical services. 19(1975), S.389-397

0.010828791 = product of:
  0.043315165 = sum of:
    0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 1905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043315165 = score(doc=1905,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 1905, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1905)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article identifies late nineteenth-century American preoccupations and prejudices within the Library of Congress classification scheme, suggesting that these ought to be of concern to the worldwide community of classifiers who now apply the scheme beyond its original context. The approach of the article is both historical and critical. It uses a number of examples to demonstrate how the ideological content of the classification scheme fails to adequately represent contemporary global realities, while recognizing, and applauding, its essential pragmatism.

0.009946881 = product of:
  0.039787523 = sum of:
    0.039787523 = weight(_text_:library in 6957) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039787523 = score(doc=6957,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 6957, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6957)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Topics concerning the Classification of Byzantine literature and, generally, of Byzantine texts are discussed, analyzed and made clear. The time boundaries of this period are described as well as the kinds of published material. Schedule PA (Supplement) of the Library of Congress Classification is discussed and evaluated as far as the handling of Byzantine literature is concerned. Schedule PA is also mentioned, as well as other relevant categories. Based on the results regarding the manner of handling Classical literature texts, it is concluded that a) Early Christian literature and the Fathers of the Church must be excluded from Class PA and b) in order to achieve a uniform, continuous, consistent and reliable classification of Byzantine texts, they must be treated according to the method proposed for Classical literature by the Library of Congress in Schedule PA.

0.009490385 = product of:
  0.03796154 = sum of:
    0.03796154 = product of:
      0.07592308 = sum of:
        0.07592308 = weight(_text_:22 in 2644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07592308 = score(doc=2644,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.43256867 = fieldWeight in 2644, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2644)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In 2003, OCLC published Dewey Decimal Classification and Relative Index, Edition 22 (DDC 22), in print and Web versions. The changes and updates in the new edition reflect a modern view of knowledge structures and address the general needs of Dewey users. The content of DDC 22 has been shaped by a number of social, geopolitical, and technical trends. The World Wide Web has provided a vehicle for more frequent distribution of updates to the DDC, and a medium for direct communication with Dewey users around the world. In addition to updating the system itself, other strategies are needed to accommodate the needs of the global Dewey user community. Translation of the system is one approach; another is mapping. Mapping terminology to the DDC is a strategy for supporting effective local implementation of the system while maintaining the internal cohesiveness of the DDC. This paper explores the usefulness of mapping terminology from English-language general subject headings lists produced outside the U.S.

Object

DDC-22

0.009475192 = product of:
  0.03790077 = sum of:
    0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 5181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03790077 = score(doc=5181,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 5181, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5181)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Nearly 25 years have elapsed since the last comprehensive measure of the percentage of academic libraries that employ the Dewey and Library of Congress systems of classification. To provide updated statistics, the researchers surveyed all 3793 academic libraries via their online catalogs. The findings indicate that the use of Dewey has declined over the past four decades. Teachers' Colleges and Community Colleges in particular have higher rates of Dewey use than large research or professional universities. This information may help support academic library reclassification decisions.

0.0086163655 = product of:
  0.034465462 = sum of:
    0.034465462 = weight(_text_:digital in 1736) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034465462 = score(doc=1736,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17432621 = fieldWeight in 1736, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1736)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to present a general overview with up-to-date information on the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) use worldwide. Design/methodology/approach - The research combined e-mail interviews with LIS professionals in 208 countries, literature research and information obtained from UDC distributors/publishers (AENOR, BSI, UDC Consortium). The following categorisation of UDC use was offered: A - dominant system; B - used in some kind of libraries only; or C - rarely used. Findings - The paper finds that, of the 208 countries contacted and researched through the literature in 2004-2006, the UDC was found to be used in 124 (60 per cent) of these. In 34 (28 per cent) of the countries researched (in Europe, Asia and Africa), UDC is the main classification system used across national information networks. In 45 (36 per cent) of the countries it is used in certain kinds of libraries. In the remaining 45 (36 per cent) of the countries it is used rarely, in only a few libraries or information centres. Research limitations/implications - It was beyond the scope of this research to provide any information regarding the actual number of institutions using UDC in a given country or to give an estimate of the size and number of document collections organised by it. Although a decline in UDC use since the 1980s was reported from a number of countries, it was not possible to measure this accurately. Practical implications - The interest shown for using UDC in the organisation of digital collections, information exchange and cross domain and cross collection resource discovery depends on accurate knowledge of its actual usage worldwide. This gives a measure of its global importance and verifies its credentials as an indexing standard. This research, which attempted wider and more systematic coverage than previous surveys, should help clarify the status of UDC and its potential use in the networked environment. Originality/value - The paper provides up-to-date information on the presence of the UDC system across countries and languages.

0.008403145 = product of:
  0.03361258 = sum of:
    0.03361258 = product of:
      0.06722516 = sum of:
        0.06722516 = weight(_text_:22 in 6993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06722516 = score(doc=6993,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 6993, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6993)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Es werden die Überlegungen im Zusammenhang mit der Einführung der Dewey-Dezimalklassifikation im deutschen Sprachraum dargestellt, wobei die künftige deutsche DDC-Ausgabe auf der Basis der 22. Auflage der Original-DDC im Mittelpunkt steht. Dringlich für eine deutsche Ausgabe sind neben Korrekturen und Expansionen für deutsche Sachverhalte, etwa im Bereich der geografischen Hilfstafel, die Schaffung eines deutschen Begriffsinventars für das Instrumentarium der DDC selbst und eine Integration der Terminologie der Schlagwortnormdatei, soweit das mit der Struktur einer Klassifikation vereinbar ist. Daneben kommt der über eine reine Übersetzung hinausgehenden Anpassung der Beispiele und Registereinträge der DDC an die Suchgewohnheiten deutschsprachiger Benutzer eine erhebliche Bedeutung zu.

0.008289068 = product of:
  0.033156272 = sum of:
    0.033156272 = weight(_text_:library in 1090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033156272 = score(doc=1090,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.25158736 = fieldWeight in 1090, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1090)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Critical race theory is introduced as a potentially useful approach to the evaluation of bibliographic classification schemes. An overview is presented of the essential elements of critical race theory, including clarifications of the meanings of some important terms such as "race" and "social justice." On the basis of a review of existing conceptions of the just and the antiracist library service, a rationale is presented for hypothesizing that critical race theory may be of use to the library and information sciences. The role of classification schemes as information institutions in their own right is established, and the Dewey Decimal Classification is introduced as the case to be studied. The challenges faced by classification-scheme designers in the construction and reconstruction of racerelated categories are reviewed; and an analysis is presented of one sense in which it might be suggested that recent (2003) revisions in one of the DDC's tables appear not to meet those challenges wholly successfully. An account is given of a further sense in which adoption of a critical race-theoretic approach has the more radical effect of calling into question a fundamental decision recently taken to "deracialize" the DDC. In conclusion, an assessment is made of critical race theory as a framework for evaluating library classification schemes.

0.008121594 = product of:
  0.032486375 = sum of:
    0.032486375 = weight(_text_:library in 1129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032486375 = score(doc=1129,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 1129, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1129)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The first mention of the decimal system of classification in the Russian library literature occured in 1895. Between 1895 and 1907, the system made little headway in Russia. In the few instances in which it was adopted during this period, the form was generally that of the UDC rather than that of the DDC. In 1908, the decimal system began to receive greater attention in Russia, owing in part to the efforts of the bibliographer B.S. Bodnarskii, a UDC proponent. In 1911, a group of St. Petersburg librarians put forward their own scheme of decimal classification for small Russian libaries. In addition to the UDC and the domestic Russian variant, DDC also received some serious attention and appears to have been most popular form in Russia following the revolution of 1917. In early 1921, however, the Russian government issued a decree singling out the UDC as the system of classification to be used in all libraries in Russia

Source

Library quarterly. 47(1977), S.431-450

0.008121594 = product of:
  0.032486375 = sum of:
    0.032486375 = weight(_text_:library in 25) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032486375 = score(doc=25,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 25, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=25)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In respect to the nature and quantity of available information, 1876 was a very different world from the one we know in the 1990s. Yet in spite of over a century of changes, the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), the system that helped organize a small college library, has grown to one that is helping the whole world organize its vast store of information resources. In this closing session, I would like to summarize some of the major factors that have contributed so far to the Dewey system's success as an information organization tool. I will also discuss ongoing efforts to ensure its viability in the future

Source

Dewey Decimal Classification: Edition 21 and international perspectives. Papers from a workshop presented at the General Conference of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), Beijing, China, August 29,1996. Ed.: L.M. Chan u. J.S. Mitchell

0.0076571116 = product of:
  0.030628446 = sum of:
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 5221) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=5221,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 5221, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5221)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Revision of the DDC is based on the growth or recasting of knowledge that is revealed in a decade of publishing. Revision takes place at the Library of Congress and is guided by several professional committees and the advice of experts. 'Decimal Classification Additions, Notes and Decisions (DC&)' conveys revisions of a minor nature between editions. Separate publications, such as for 004-006 Data Processing and Computer Science, make extensive revisions available between editions

0.0076571116 = product of:
  0.030628446 = sum of:
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 1650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=1650,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 1650, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1650)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Annals of library and information studies. 62(2015) no.4, S. 226-230

0.0076571116 = product of:
  0.030628446 = sum of:
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 2789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=2789,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 2789, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2789)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Annals of library and information studies. 62(2015) no.4, S.265-267

0.0067907665 = product of:
  0.027163066 = sum of:
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Bulletin d'informations de l'Association des Bibliothecaires Francais. 1997, no.175, S.22-23

0.0067907665 = product of:
  0.027163066 = sum of:
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 1095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=1095,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1095, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1095)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In diesem Beitrag wird die Zielsetzung und die geplante Durchführung des Projektes DDC Deutsch zur Herstellung einer deutschen Version der 22. Ausgabe der Dewey Decimal Classification näher beschrieben. Es werden Gründe für die Durchführung des Vorhabens diskutiert und der erwartete spätere Nutzen beschrieben.

0.0067907665 = product of:
  0.027163066 = sum of:
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 4337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=4337,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4337, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4337)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

7. 7.2018 17:22:00