Search (247 results, page 1 of 13)

  • × theme_ss:"Klassifikationstheorie: Elemente / Struktur"
  1. Belayche, C.: ¬A propos de la classification de Dewey (1997) 0.12 
    0.11727117 = sum of:
  0.051207434 = product of:
    0.20482974 = sum of:
      0.20482974 = weight(_text_:author's in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.20482974 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.34484094 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.59398323 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.06606373 = sum of:
    0.01044454 = weight(_text_:a in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01044454 = score(doc=1171,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051314447 = queryNorm
        0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
    0.05561919 = weight(_text_:22 in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05561919 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051314447 = 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)
    Abstract
    All classifications are based on ideologies and Dewey is marked by its author's origins in 19th century North America. Subsequent revisions indicate changed ways of understanding the world. Section 157 (psycho-pathology) is now included with 616.89 (mental troubles), reflecting the move to a genetic-based approach. Table 5 (racial, ethnic and national groups) is however unchanged, despite changing views on such categorisation
    Source
    Bulletin d'informations de l'Association des Bibliothecaires Francais. 1997, no.175, S.22-23
    Type
    a
  2. Maniez, J.: ¬Des classifications aux thesaurus : du bon usage des facettes (1999) 0.05 
    0.04623701 = product of:
  0.09247402 = sum of:
    0.09247402 = sum of:
      0.009045236 = weight(_text_:a in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009045236 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 6404, 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=6404)
      0.083428785 = weight(_text_:22 in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.083428785 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6404, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6404)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
    Type
    a
  3. Maniez, J.: ¬Du bon usage des facettes : des classifications aux thésaurus (1999) 0.05 
    0.04623701 = product of:
  0.09247402 = sum of:
    0.09247402 = sum of:
      0.009045236 = weight(_text_:a in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009045236 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3773, 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=3773)
      0.083428785 = weight(_text_:22 in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.083428785 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
    Type
    a
  4. Foskett, D.J.: Systems theory and its relevance to documentary classification (2017) 0.05 
    0.04623701 = product of:
  0.09247402 = sum of:
    0.09247402 = sum of:
      0.009045236 = weight(_text_:a in 3176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009045236 = score(doc=3176,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3176, 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=3176)
      0.083428785 = weight(_text_:22 in 3176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.083428785 = score(doc=3176,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3176, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3176)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    6. 5.2017 18:46:22
    Type
    a
  5. Raju, A.A.N.: Colon Classification: theory and practice : a self instructional manual (2001) 0.04 
    0.035268568 = sum of:
  0.032004647 = product of:
    0.12801859 = sum of:
      0.12801859 = weight(_text_:author's in 1482) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12801859 = score(doc=1482,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.34484094 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.3712395 = fieldWeight in 1482, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1482)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.0032639187 = product of:
    0.0065278374 = sum of:
      0.0065278374 = weight(_text_:a in 1482) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0065278374 = score(doc=1482,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.11032722 = fieldWeight in 1482, 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=1482)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Colon Classification (CC) is truly the first freely faceted scheme for library classification devised and propagated by Dr. S.R. Ranganathan. The scheme is being taught in theory and practice to the students in most of the LIS schools in India and abroad also. Many manuals, Guide books and Introductory works have been published on CC in the past. But the present work tread a new path in presenting CC to the student, teaching and professional community. The present work Colon Classification: Theory and Practice; A Self Instructional Manual is the result of author's twenty-five years experience of teaching theory and practice of CC to the students of LIS. For the first ime concerted and systematic attempt has been made to present theory and practice of CC in self-instructional mode, keeping in view the requirements of students learners of Open Universities/ Distance Education Institutions in particular. The other singificant and novel features introduced in this manual are: Presenting the scope of each block consisting certain units bollowed by objectives, introduction, sections, sub-sections, self check exercises, glossary and assignment of each unit. It is hoped that all these features will help the users/readers of this manual to understand and grasp quickly, the intricacies involved in theory and practice of CC(6th Edition). The manual is presented in three blocks and twelve units.
  6. Connaway, L.S.; Sievert, M.C.: Comparison of three classification systems for information on health insurance (1996) 0.03 
    0.03207356 = product of:
  0.06414712 = sum of:
    0.06414712 = sum of:
      0.008527931 = weight(_text_:a in 7242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.008527931 = score(doc=7242,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 7242, 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=7242)
      0.05561919 = weight(_text_:22 in 7242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05561919 = score(doc=7242,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7242, 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=7242)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Reports results of a comparative study of 3 classification schemes: LCC, DDC and NLM Classification to determine their effectiveness in classifying materials on health insurance. Examined 2 hypotheses: that there would be no differences in the scatter of the 3 classification schemes; and that there would be overlap between all 3 schemes but no difference in the classes into which the subject was placed. There was subject scatter in all 3 classification schemes and litlle overlap between the 3 systems
    Date
    22. 4.1997 21:10:19
    Type
    a
  7. Lin, W.-Y.C.: ¬The concept and applications of faceted classifications (2006) 0.03 
    0.030824674 = product of:
  0.06164935 = sum of:
    0.06164935 = sum of:
      0.006030157 = weight(_text_:a in 5083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.006030157 = score(doc=5083,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 5083, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5083)
      0.05561919 = weight(_text_:22 in 5083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05561919 = score(doc=5083,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5083, 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=5083)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    27. 5.2007 22:19:35
    Type
    a
  8. Lorenz, B.: Zur Theorie und Terminologie der bibliothekarischen Klassifikation (2018) 0.03 
    0.030824674 = product of:
  0.06164935 = sum of:
    0.06164935 = sum of:
      0.006030157 = weight(_text_:a in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.006030157 = score(doc=4339,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 4339, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4339)
      0.05561919 = weight(_text_:22 in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05561919 = score(doc=4339,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4339, 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=4339)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Pages
    S.1-22
    Type
    a
  9. Szostak, R.: Classifying science : phenomena, data, theory, method, practice (2004) 0.03 
    0.030148273 = sum of:
  0.027156843 = product of:
    0.10862737 = sum of:
      0.10862737 = weight(_text_:author's in 325) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10862737 = score(doc=325,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.34484094 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.31500718 = fieldWeight in 325, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=325)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.002991431 = product of:
    0.005982862 = sum of:
      0.005982862 = weight(_text_:a in 325) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.005982862 = score(doc=325,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.10111657 = fieldWeight in 325, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=325)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Classification is the essential first step in science. The study of science, as well as the practice of science, will thus benefit from a detailed classification of different types of science. In this book, science - defined broadly to include the social sciences and humanities - is first unpacked into its constituent elements: the phenomena studied, the data used, the theories employed, the methods applied, and the practices of scientists. These five elements are then classified in turn. Notably, the classifications of both theory types and methods allow the key strengths and weaknesses of different theories and methods to be readily discerned and compared. Connections across classifications are explored: should certain theories or phenomena be investigated only with certain methods? What is the proper function and form of scientific paradigms? Are certain common errors and biases in scientific practice associated with particular phenomena, data, theories, or methods? The classifications point to several ways of improving both specialized and interdisciplinary research and teaching, and especially of enhancing communication across communities of scholars. The classifications also support a superior system of document classification that would allow searches by theory and method used as well as causal links investigated.
    Content
    Inhalt: - Chapter 1: Classifying Science: 1.1. A Simple Classificatory Guideline - 1.2. The First "Cut" (and Plan of Work) - 1.3. Some Preliminaries - Chapter 2: Classifying Phenomena and Data: 2.1. Classifying Phenomena - 2.2. Classifying Data - Chapter 3: Classifying Theory: 3.1. Typology of Theory - 3.2. What Is a Theory? - 3.3. Evaluating Theories - 3.4. Types of Theory and the Five Types of Causation - 3.5. Classifying Individual Theories - 3.6. Advantages of a Typology of Theory - Chapter 4: Classifying Method: 4.1. Classifying Methods - 4.2. Typology of Strengths and Weaknesses of Methods - 4.3. Qualitative Versus Quantitative Analysis Revisited - 4.4. Evaluating Methods - 4.5. Classifying Particular Methods Within The Typology - 4.6. Advantages of a Typology of Methods - Chapter 5: Classifying Practice: 5.1. Errors and Biases in ScienceChapter - 5.2. Typology of (Critiques of) Scientific Practice - 5.3. Utilizing This Classification - 5.4. The Five Types of Ethical Analysis - Chapter 6: Drawing Connections Across These Classifications: 6.1. Theory and Method - 6.2. Theory (Method) and Phenomena (Data) - 6.3. Better Paradigms - 6.4. Critiques of Scientific Practice: Are They Correlated with Other Classifications? - Chapter 7: Classifying Scientific Documents: 7.1. Faceted or Enumerative? - 7.2. Classifying By Phenomena Studied - 7.3. Classifying By Theory Used - 7.4. Classifying By Method Used - 7.5 Links Among Subjects - 7.6. Type of Work, Language, and More - 7.7. Critiques of Scientific Practice - 7.8. Classifying Philosophy - 7.9. Evaluating the System - Chapter 8: Concluding Remarks: 8.1. The Classifications - 8.2. Advantages of These Various Classifications - 8.3. Drawing Connections Across Classifications - 8.4. Golden Mean Arguments - 8.5. Why Should Science Be Believed? - 8.6. How Can Science Be Improved? - 8.7. How Should Science Be Taught?
    Footnote
    Rez. in: KO 32(2005) no.2, S.93-95 (H. Albrechtsen): "The book deals with mapping of the structures and contents of sciences, defined broadly to include the social sciences and the humanities. According to the author, the study of science, as well as the practice of science, could benefit from a detailed classification of different types of science. The book defines five universal constituents of the sciences: phenomena, data, theories, methods and practice. For each of these constituents, the author poses five questions, in the well-known 5W format: Who, What, Where, When, Why? - with the addition of the question How? (Szostak 2003). Two objectives of the author's endeavor stand out: 1) decision support for university curriculum development across disciplines and decision support for university students at advanced levels of education in selection of appropriate courses for their projects and to support cross-disciplinary inquiry for researchers and students; 2) decision support for researchers and students in scientific inquiry across disciplines, methods and theories. The main prospective audience of this book is university curriculum developers, university students and researchers, in that order of priority. The heart of the book is the chapters unfolding the author's ideas about how to classify phenomena and data, theory, method and practice, by use of the 5W inquiry model. . . .
  10. Olson, H.A.: Sameness and difference : a cultural foundation of classification (2001) 0.03 
    0.02890288 = product of:
  0.05780576 = sum of:
    0.05780576 = sum of:
      0.009138972 = weight(_text_:a in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009138972 = score(doc=166,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 166, 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=166)
      0.04866679 = weight(_text_:22 in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04866679 = score(doc=166,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 166, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=166)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The idea of sameness is used to gather material in classifications. However, it is also used to separate what is different. Sameness and difference as guiding principles of classification seem obvious but are actually fundamental characteristics specifically related to Western culture. Sameness is not a singular factor, but has the potential to represent multiple characteristics or facets. This article explores the ramifications of which characteristics are used to define classifications and in what order. It explains the primacy of division by discipline, its origins in Western philosophy, and the cultural specificity that results. The Dewey Decimal Classification is used as an example throughout.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Type
    a
  11. Gnoli, C.: Classifying phenomena : part 4: themes and rhemes (2018) 0.03 
    0.02835711 = product of:
  0.05671422 = sum of:
    0.05671422 = sum of:
      0.014999828 = weight(_text_:a in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.014999828 = score(doc=4152,freq=22.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.25351265 = fieldWeight in 4152, product of:
            4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
              22.0 = termFreq=22.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4152)
      0.041714393 = weight(_text_:22 in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041714393 = score(doc=4152,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4152, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4152)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This is the fourth in a series of papers on classification based on phenomena instead of disciplines. Together with types, levels and facets that have been discussed in the previous parts, themes and rhemes are further structural components of such a classification. In a statement or in a longer document, a base theme and several particular themes can be identified. Base theme should be cited first in a classmark, followed by particular themes, each with its own facets. In some cases, rhemes can also be expressed, that is new information provided about a theme, converting an abstract statement ("wolves, affected by cervids") into a claim that some thing actually occurs ("wolves are affected by cervids"). In the Integrative Levels Classification rhemes can be expressed by special deictic classes, including those for actual specimens, anaphoras, unknown values, conjunctions and spans, whole universe, anthropocentric favoured classes, and favoured host classes. These features, together with rules for pronounciation, make a classification of phenomena a true language, that may be suitable for many uses.
    Date
    17. 2.2018 18:22:25
    Type
    a
  12. Winske, E.: ¬The development and structure of an urban, regional, and local documents classification scheme (1996) 0.03 
    0.028064365 = product of:
  0.05612873 = sum of:
    0.05612873 = sum of:
      0.0074619395 = weight(_text_:a in 7241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0074619395 = score(doc=7241,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 7241, 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=7241)
      0.04866679 = weight(_text_:22 in 7241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04866679 = score(doc=7241,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7241, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7241)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Footnote
    Paper presented at conference on 'Local documents, a new classification scheme' at the Research Caucus of the Florida Library Association Annual Conference, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 22 Apr 95
    Type
    a
  13. Kwasnik, B.H.: ¬The role of classification in knowledge representation (1999) 0.03 
    0.027253143 = product of:
  0.054506287 = sum of:
    0.054506287 = sum of:
      0.012791895 = weight(_text_:a in 2464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.012791895 = score(doc=2464,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 2464, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2464)
      0.041714393 = weight(_text_:22 in 2464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041714393 = score(doc=2464,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2464, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2464)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    A fascinating, broad-ranging article about classification, knowledge, and how they relate. Hierarchies, trees, paradigms (a two-dimensional classification that can look something like a spreadsheet), and facets are covered, with descriptions of how they work and how they can be used for knowledge discovery and creation. Kwasnick outlines how to make a faceted classification: choose facets, develop facets, analyze entities using the facets, and make a citation order. Facets are useful for many reasons: they do not require complete knowledge of the entire body of material; they are hospitable, flexible, and expressive; they do not require a rigid background theory; they can mix theoretical structures and models; and they allow users to view things from many perspectives. Facets do have faults: it can be hard to pick the right ones; it is hard to show relations between them; and it is difficult to visualize them. The coverage of the other methods is equally thorough and there is much to consider for anyone putting a classification on the web.
    Source
    Library trends. 48(1999) no.1, S.22-47
    Type
    a
  14. Hjoerland, B.: Theories of knowledge organization - theories of knowledge (2017) 0.03 
    0.02697159 = product of:
  0.05394318 = sum of:
    0.05394318 = sum of:
      0.0052763876 = weight(_text_:a in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0052763876 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
      0.04866679 = weight(_text_:22 in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04866679 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Pages
    S.22-36
    Type
    a
  15. Howarth, L.C.; Jansen, E.H.: Towards a typology of warrant for 21st century knowledge organization systems (2014) 0.03 
    0.025913637 = product of:
  0.051827274 = sum of:
    0.051827274 = sum of:
      0.010112882 = weight(_text_:a in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.010112882 = score(doc=1425,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 1425, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1425)
      0.041714393 = weight(_text_:22 in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041714393 = score(doc=1425,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1425, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1425)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This paper returns to Beghtol's (1986) insightful typology of warrant to consider an empirical example of a traditional top-down hierarchical classification system as it continues to evolve in the early 21st century. Our examination considers there may be multiple warrants identified among the processes of design and the relationships to users of the National Occupational Classification (NOC), the standard occupational classification system published in Canada. We argue that this shift in semantic warrant signals a transition for traditional knowledge organization systems, and that warrant continues to be a relevant analytical concept and organizing principle, both within and beyond the domain of bibliographic control.
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
    Type
    a
  16. Vukadin, A.; Slavic, A.: Challenges of facet analysis and concept placement in Universal Classifications : the example of architecture in UDC (2014) 0.03 
    0.025913637 = product of:
  0.051827274 = sum of:
    0.051827274 = sum of:
      0.010112882 = weight(_text_:a in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.010112882 = score(doc=1428,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 1428, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1428)
      0.041714393 = weight(_text_:22 in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041714393 = score(doc=1428,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1428, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1428)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The paper discusses the challenges of faceted vocabulary organization in universal classifications which treat the universe of knowledge as a coherent whole and in which the concepts and subjects in different disciplines are shared, related and combined. The authors illustrate the challenges of the facet analytical approach using, as an example, the revision of class 72 in UDC. The paper reports on the research undertaken in 2013 as preparation for the revision. This consisted of analysis of concept organization in the UDC schedules in comparison with the Art & Architecture Thesaurus and class W of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification. The paper illustrates how such research can contribute to a better understanding of the field and may lead to improvements in the facet structure of this segment of the UDC vocabulary.
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
    Type
    a
  17. Fairthorne, R.A.: Temporal structure in bibliographic classification (1985) 0.03 
    0.025498006 = sum of:
  0.01920279 = product of:
    0.07681116 = sum of:
      0.07681116 = weight(_text_:author's in 3651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07681116 = score(doc=3651,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.34484094 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.22274372 = fieldWeight in 3651, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3651)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.0062952177 = product of:
    0.012590435 = sum of:
      0.012590435 = weight(_text_:a in 3651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.012590435 = score(doc=3651,freq=62.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.21279141 = fieldWeight in 3651, product of:
            7.8740077 = tf(freq=62.0), with freq of:
              62.0 = termFreq=62.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3651)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This paper, presented at the Ottawa Conference an the Conceptual Basis of the Classification of Knowledge, in 1971, is one of Fairthorne's more perceptive works and deserves a wide audience, especially as it breaks new ground in classification theory. In discussing the notion of discourse, he makes a "distinction between what discourse mentions and what discourse is about" [emphasis added], considered as a "fundamental factor to the relativistic nature of bibliographic classification" (p. 360). A table of mathematical functions, for example, describes exactly something represented by a collection of digits, but, without a preface, this table does not fit into a broader context. Some indication of the author's intent ls needed to fit the table into a broader context. This intent may appear in a title, chapter heading, class number or some other aid. Discourse an and discourse about something "cannot be determined solely from what it mentions" (p. 361). Some kind of background is needed. Fairthorne further develops the theme that knowledge about a subject comes from previous knowledge, thus adding a temporal factor to classification. "Some extra textual criteria are needed" in order to classify (p. 362). For example, "documents that mention the same things, but are an different topics, will have different ancestors, in the sense of preceding documents to which they are linked by various bibliographic characteristics ... [and] ... they will have different descendants" (p. 363). The classifier has to distinguish between documents that "mention exactly the same thing" but are not about the same thing. The classifier does this by classifying "sets of documents that form their histories, their bibliographic world lines" (p. 363). The practice of citation is one method of performing the linking and presents a "fan" of documents connected by a chain of citations to past work. The fan is seen as the effect of generations of documents - each generation connected to the previous one, and all ancestral to the present document. Thus, there are levels in temporal structure-that is, antecedent and successor documents-and these require that documents be identified in relation to other documents. This gives a set of documents an "irrevocable order," a loose order which Fairthorne calls "bibliographic time," and which is "generated by the fact of continual growth" (p. 364). He does not consider "bibliographic time" to be an equivalent to physical time because bibliographic events, as part of communication, require delay. Sets of documents, as indicated above, rather than single works, are used in classification. While an event, a person, a unique feature of the environment, may create a class of one-such as the French Revolution, Napoleon, Niagara Falls-revolutions, emperors, and waterfalls are sets which, as sets, will subsume individuals and make normal classes.
    The fan of past documents may be seen across time as a philosophical "wake," translated documents as a sideways relationship and future documents as another fan spreading forward from a given document (p. 365). The "overlap of reading histories can be used to detect common interests among readers," (p. 365) and readers may be classified accordingly. Finally, Fairthorne rejects the notion of a "general" classification, which he regards as a mirage, to be replaced by a citation-type network to identify classes. An interesting feature of his work lies in his linkage between old and new documents via a bibliographic method-citations, authors' names, imprints, style, and vocabulary - rather than topical (subject) terms. This is an indirect method of creating classes. The subject (aboutness) is conceived as a finite, common sharing of knowledge over time (past, present, and future) as opposed to the more common hierarchy of topics in an infinite schema assumed to be universally useful. Fairthorne, a mathematician by training, is a prolific writer an the foundations of classification and information. His professional career includes work with the Royal Engineers Chemical Warfare Section and the Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE). He was the founder of the Computing Unit which became the RAE Mathematics Department.
    Footnote
    Original in: Ottawa Conference on the Conceptual Basis of the Classification of Knowledge, Ottawa, 1971. Ed.: Jerzy A Wojceichowski. Pullach: Verlag Dokumentation 1974. S.404-412.
    Source
    Theory of subject analysis: a sourcebook. Ed.: L.M. Chan, et al
    Type
    a
  18. Slavic, A.: On the nature and typology of documentary classifications and their use in a networked environment (2007) 0.03 
    0.025379814 = product of:
  0.05075963 = sum of:
    0.05075963 = sum of:
      0.009045236 = weight(_text_:a in 780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009045236 = score(doc=780,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 780, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=780)
      0.041714393 = weight(_text_:22 in 780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041714393 = score(doc=780,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 780, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=780)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Networked orientated standards for vocabulary publishing and exchange and proposals for terminological services and terminology registries will improve sharing and use of all knowledge organization systems in the networked information environment. This means that documentary classifications may also become more applicable for use outside their original domain of application. The paper summarises some characteristics common to documentary classifications and explains some terminological, functional and implementation aspects. The original purpose behind each classification scheme determines the functions that the vocabulary is designed to facilitate. These functions influence the structure, semantics and syntax, scheme coverage and format in which classification data are published and made available. The author suggests that attention should be paid to the differences between documentary classifications as these may determine their suitability for a certain purpose and may impose different requirements with respect to their use online. As we speak, many classifications are being created for knowledge organization and it may be important to promote expertise from the bibliographic domain with respect to building and using classification systems.
    Date
    22.12.2007 17:22:31
    Type
    a
  19. Jacob, E.K.: Proposal for a classification of classifications built on Beghtol's distinction between "Naïve Classification" and "Professional Classification" (2010) 0.03 
    0.025379814 = product of:
  0.05075963 = sum of:
    0.05075963 = sum of:
      0.009045236 = weight(_text_:a in 2945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009045236 = score(doc=2945,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 2945, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2945)
      0.041714393 = weight(_text_:22 in 2945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041714393 = score(doc=2945,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17969444 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2945, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2945)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Argues that Beghtol's (2003) use of the terms "naive classification" and "professional classification" is valid because they are nominal definitions and that the distinction between these two types of classification points up the need for researchers in knowledge organization to broaden their scope beyond traditional classification systems intended for information retrieval. Argues that work by Beghtol (2003), Kwasnik (1999) and Bailey (1994) offer direction for the development of a classification of classifications based on the pragmatic dimensions of extant classification systems. Bezugnahme auf: Beghtol, C.: Naïve classification systems and the global information society. In: Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine. Würzburg: Ergon Verlag 2004. S.19-22. (Advances in knowledge organization; vol.9)
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Special issue: A Festschrift for Clare Beghtol
    Type
    a
  20. Broughton, V.: Essential classification (2004) 0.02 
    0.023216877 = sum of:
  0.018104563 = product of:
    0.07241825 = sum of:
      0.07241825 = weight(_text_:author's in 2824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07241825 = score(doc=2824,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.34484094 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.21000479 = fieldWeight in 2824, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2824)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.0051123146 = product of:
    0.010224629 = sum of:
      0.010224629 = weight(_text_:a in 2824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.010224629 = score(doc=2824,freq=92.0), product of:
          0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051314447 = queryNorm
          0.17280684 = fieldWeight in 2824, product of:
            9.591663 = tf(freq=92.0), with freq of:
              92.0 = termFreq=92.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2824)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Classification is a crucial skill for all information workers involved in organizing collections, but it is a difficult concept to grasp - and is even more difficult to put into practice. Essential Classification offers full guidance an how to go about classifying a document from scratch. This much-needed text leads the novice classifier step by step through the basics of subject cataloguing, with an emphasis an practical document analysis and classification. It deals with fundamental questions of the purpose of classification in different situations, and the needs and expectations of end users. The novice is introduced to the ways in which document content can be assessed, and how this can best be expressed for translation into the language of specific indexing and classification systems. The characteristics of the major general schemes of classification are discussed, together with their suitability for different classification needs.
    Footnote
    Rez. in: KO 32(2005) no.1, S.47-49 (M. Hudon): "Vanda Broughton's Essential Classification is the most recent addition to a very small set of classification textbooks published over the past few years. The book's 21 chapters are based very closely an the cataloguing and classification module at the School of Library, Archive, and Information studies at University College, London. The author's main objective is clear: this is "first and foremost a book about how to classify. The emphasis throughout is an the activity of classification rather than the theory, the practical problems of the organization of collections, and the needs of the users" (p. 1). This is not a theoretical work, but a basic course in classification and classification scheme application. For this reviewer, who also teaches "Classification 101," this is also a fascinating peek into how a colleague organizes content and structures her course. "Classification is everywhere" (p. 1): the first sentence of this book is also one of the first statements in my own course, and Professor Broughton's metaphors - the supermarket, canned peas, flowers, etc. - are those that are used by our colleagues around the world. The combination of tone, writing style and content display are reader-friendly; they are in fact what make this book remarkable and what distinguishes it from more "formal" textbooks, such as The Organization of Information, the superb text written and recently updated (2004) by Professor Arlene Taylor (2nd ed. Westport, Conn.: Libraries Unlimited, 2004). Reading Essential Classification, at times, feels like being in a classroom, facing a teacher who assures you that "you don't need to worry about this at this stage" (p. 104), and reassures you that, although you now speed a long time looking for things, "you will soon speed up when you get to know the scheme better" (p. 137). This teacher uses redundancy in a productive fashion, and she is not afraid to express her own opinions ("I think that if these concepts are helpful they may be used" (p. 245); "It's annoying that LCC doesn't provide clearer instructions, but if you keep your head and take them one step at a time [i.e. the tables] they're fairly straightforward" (p. 174)). Chapters 1 to 7 present the essential theoretical concepts relating to knowledge organization and to bibliographic classification. The author is adept at making and explaining distinctions: known-item retrieval versus subject retrieval, personal versus public/shared/official classification systems, scientific versus folk classification systems, object versus aspect classification systems, semantic versus syntactic relationships, and so on. Chapters 8 and 9 discuss the practice of classification, through content analysis and subject description. A short discussion of difficult subjects, namely the treatment of unique concepts (persons, places, etc.) as subjects seems a little advanced for a beginners' class.
    In Chapter 10, "Controlled indexing languages," Professor Broughton states that a classification scheme is truly a language "since it permits communication and the exchange of information" (p. 89), a Statement with which this reviewer wholly agrees. Chapter 11, however, "Word-based approaches to retrieval," moves us to a different field altogether, offering only a narrow view of the whole world of controlled indexing languages such as thesauri, and presenting disconnected discussions of alphabetical filing, form and structure of subject headings, modern developments in alphabetical subject indexing, etc. Chapters 12 and 13 focus an the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), without even a passing reference to existing subject headings lists in other languages (French RAMEAU, German SWK, etc.). If it is not surprising to see a section on subject headings in a book on classification, the two subjects being taught together in most library schools, the location of this section in the middle of this particular book is more difficult to understand. Chapter 14 brings the reader back to classification, for a discussion of essentials of classification scheme application. The following five chapters present in turn each one of the three major and currently used bibliographic classification schemes, in order of increasing complexity and difficulty of application. The Library of Congress Classification (LCC), the easiest to use, is covered in chapters 15 and 16. The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) deserves only a one-chapter treatment (Chapter 17), while the functionalities of the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), which Professor Broughton knows extremely well, are described in chapters 18 and 19. Chapter 20 is a general discussion of faceted classification, on par with the first seven chapters for its theoretical content. Chapter 21, an interesting last chapter on managing classification, addresses down-to-earth matters such as the cost of classification, the need for re-classification, advantages and disadvantages of using print versions or e-versions of classification schemes, choice of classification scheme, general versus special scheme. But although the questions are interesting, the chapter provides only a very general overview of what appropriate answers might be. To facilitate reading and learning, summaries are strategically located at various places in the text, and always before switching to a related subject. Professor Broughton's choice of examples is always interesting, and sometimes even entertaining (see for example "Inside out: A brief history of underwear" (p. 71)). With many examples, however, and particularly those that appear in the five chapters an classification scheme applications, the novice reader would have benefited from more detailed explanations. On page 221, for example, "The history and social influence of the potato" results in this analysis of concepts: Potato - Sociology, and in the UDC class number: 635.21:316. What happened to the "history" aspect? Some examples are not very convincing: in Animals RT Reproduction and Art RT Reproduction (p. 102), the associative relationship is not appropriate as it is used to distinguish homographs and would do nothing to help either the indexer or the user at the retrieval stage.
    Essential Classification is also an exercise book. Indeed, it contains a number of practical exercises and activities in every chapter, along with suggested answers. Unfortunately, the answers are too often provided without the justifications and explanations that students would no doubt demand. The author has taken great care to explain all technical terms in her text, but formal definitions are also gathered in an extensive 172-term Glossary; appropriately, these terms appear in bold type the first time they are used in the text. A short, very short, annotated bibliography of standard classification textbooks and of manuals for the use of major classification schemes is provided. A detailed 11-page index completes the set of learning aids which will be useful to an audience of students in their effort to grasp the basic concepts of the theory and the practice of document classification in a traditional environment. Essential Classification is a fine textbook. However, this reviewer deplores the fact that it presents only a very "traditional" view of classification, without much reference to newer environments such as the Internet where classification also manifests itself in various forms. In Essential Classification, books are always used as examples, and we have to take the author's word that traditional classification practices and tools can also be applied to other types of documents and elsewhere than in the traditional library. Vanda Broughton writes, for example, that "Subject headings can't be used for physical arrangement" (p. 101), but this is not entirely true. Subject headings can be used for physical arrangement of vertical files, for example, with each folder bearing a simple or complex heading which is then used for internal organization. And if it is true that subject headings cannot be reproduced an the spine of [physical] books (p. 93), the situation is certainly different an the World Wide Web where subject headings as metadata can be most useful in ordering a collection of hot links. The emphasis is also an the traditional paperbased, rather than an the electronic version of classification schemes, with excellent justifications of course. The reality is, however, that supporting organizations (LC, OCLC, etc.) are now providing great quality services online, and that updates are now available only in an electronic format and not anymore on paper. E-based versions of classification schemes could be safely ignored in a theoretical text, but they have to be described and explained in a textbook published in 2005. One last comment: Professor Broughton tends to use the same term, "classification" to represent the process (as in classification is grouping) and the tool (as in constructing a classification, using a classification, etc.). Even in the Glossary where classification is first well-defined as a process, and classification scheme as "a set of classes ...", the definition of classification scheme continues: "the classification consists of a vocabulary (...) and syntax..." (p. 296-297). Such an ambiguous use of the term classification seems unfortunate and unnecessarily confusing in an otherwise very good basic textbook an categorization of concepts and subjects, document organization and subject representation."

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

  • a 221
  • m 20
  • el 10
  • s 4
  • b 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications