Search (16 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  • × theme_ss:"International bedeutende Universalklassifikationen"
  1. Junger, U.: Basisinformationen zur Universellen Dezimalklassifikation (UDK) (2018) 0.03
    0.02766634 = product of:
      0.05533268 = sum of:
        0.05533268 = sum of:
          0.0054123 = weight(_text_:a in 4337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0054123 = score(doc=4337,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 4337, 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=4337)
          0.04992038 = weight(_text_:22 in 4337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04992038 = score(doc=4337,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = 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)
    
    Date
    7. 7.2018 17:22:00
    Type
    a
  2. Satija, M.P.: Abridged Dewey-15 (2012) in historical perspectives (2012) 0.02
    0.01974305 = product of:
      0.0394861 = sum of:
        0.0394861 = sum of:
          0.008285859 = weight(_text_:a in 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.008285859 = score(doc=116,freq=12.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 116, 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=116)
          0.03120024 = weight(_text_:22 in 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03120024 = score(doc=116,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The origin of the abridged edition of the Dewey system goes back to 1894 when an outline of 192 pages based on the full 5th Edition (1894) was issued for small public and school libraries of North America. New editions have appeared regularly following closely the publication of new full editions. An abridged version, which is always in one volume, comprises an introduction, schedules, four tables (namely 1, 2, 3 and 4) only, and the relative index and other minor features of the full edition, and has shorter numbers. Abridged 15 is a logical abridgement of the DDC23 (2011) and is a product of a new approach to development of an abridged edition of the DDC. Its content has been derived from the DDC database applying a set of rules to extract the edition using the new (2010) version of the editorial support system. The revision process has been informed by interaction with an always widening and diversified Dewey community at home and abroad. It aims to improve the currency of the schedules continuing to serve as shelving tool while recognizing its 'other' uses as a spinoff of its simplicity and inexpensiveness.
    Date
    3. 3.2016 18:59:22
    Type
    a
  3. Panzer, M.: Dewey: how to make it work for you (2013) 0.02
    0.01938208 = product of:
      0.03876416 = sum of:
        0.03876416 = sum of:
          0.0075639198 = weight(_text_:a in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0075639198 = score(doc=5797,freq=10.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 5797, product of:
                3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                  10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5797)
          0.03120024 = weight(_text_:22 in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03120024 = score(doc=5797,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5797, 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=5797)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The article discusses various aspects of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system of classifying library books in 2013. Background is presented on some librarians' desire to stop using DDC and adopt a genre-based system of classification. It says librarians can use the DDC to deal with problems and issues related to library book classification. It highlights the benefits of using captions and relative index terms and semantic relationships in DDC.
    Content
    "As knowledge brokers, we are living in interesting times for libraries and librarians. We wonder sometimes if our traditional tools like the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system can cope with the onslaught of information. The categories provided don't always seem adequate for the knowledge-discovery habits of today's patrons. They have grown accustomed to new ways for their information needs to be met, from the fire-and-forget style of a hard-to-control classic Google search to the pervasive, always-on style of Google Now, anticipating users' information needs without their having even asked a verbal question. Contrariwise, I believe that we, as librarians, could be making better use of our tools. Many (like the DDC) are a reflection of the same social and epistemological forces that brought about modernity at the turn of the last century. We as librarians are in the unique position of providing services that are as ground-breaking as these tools. As we see the need to provide unique and cutting-edge knowledge discovery to our users, I argue in this article that the DDC can play a key role in fulfilling this purpose."
    Source
    Knowledge quest. 42(2013) no.2, S.22-29
  4. McIlwaine, I.C.: Universal Bibliographic Control and the quest for a universally acceptable subject arrangement (2010) 0.00
    0.0033143433 = product of:
      0.0066286866 = sum of:
        0.0066286866 = product of:
          0.013257373 = sum of:
            0.013257373 = weight(_text_:a in 3567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.013257373 = score(doc=3567,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.24964198 = fieldWeight in 3567, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3567)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Achieving widespread agreement on subject organization is a complex task, and a challenge greater than that of creating a standard bibliographic description for international exchange-the goal of Universal Bibliographic Control (UBC). This article traces the history of the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), its relationship with other schemes, and opportunities for further collaboration.
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem special issue: Is there a catalog in your future? Celebrating Nancy J. Williamson: Scholar, educator, colleague, mentor
    Type
    a
  5. Salah, A.A.; Gao, C.; Suchecki, K.; Scharnhorst, A.; Smiraglia, R.P.: ¬The evolution of classification systems : ontogeny of the UDC (2012) 0.00
    0.0023678814 = product of:
      0.0047357627 = sum of:
        0.0047357627 = product of:
          0.009471525 = sum of:
            0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009471525 = score(doc=825,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 825, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=825)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    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.
    Source
    Categories, contexts and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India. Eds.: Neelameghan, A. u. K.S. Raghavan
    Type
    a
  6. Chatterjee, A.: Universal Decimal Classification and Colon Classification : their mutual impact (2015) 0.00
    0.0023435948 = product of:
      0.0046871896 = sum of:
        0.0046871896 = product of:
          0.009374379 = sum of:
            0.009374379 = weight(_text_:a in 1650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009374379 = score(doc=1650,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 1650, 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=1650)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), being a predecessor of Colon Classification (CC), had impacts on CC in various ways - directly as well as indirectly. But surprisingly CC too made an impact on UDC in various ways during its revision process. The paper discusses how these two classification schemes have influenced each other in different spheres.
    Type
    a
  7. Piros, A.: ¬The thought behind the symbol : about the automatic interpretation and representation of UDC numbers (2017) 0.00
    0.0020714647 = product of:
      0.0041429293 = sum of:
        0.0041429293 = product of:
          0.008285859 = sum of:
            0.008285859 = weight(_text_:a in 3853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.008285859 = score(doc=3853,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 3853, 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=3853)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Analytico-synthetic and faceted classifications, such as Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) provide facilities to express pre-coordinated subject statements using syntactic relations. In this case, the relevance, in the process of UDC-based information retrieval, can be determined by extracting the meaning of the classmarks as precisely as is possible. The central question here is how the identification mentioned above can be supported by automatic means and an analysis of the structure of complex classmarks appears to be an obvious requirement. Many bibliographic sources contain complex UDC classmarks which are stored as simple text strings and on which it is very difficult to perform any meaningful information discovery. The paper presents results from a phase of ongoing research focused on developing a new platform-independent, machine-processable data format capable of representing the whole syntactic structure of the composite UDC numbers to support their further automatic processing. An algorithm that can produce the representation of the numbers in such a format directly from their designations has also been developed and implemented. The research also includes implementing conversion methods to provide outputs that can be employed by other software directly and, as a service, make them available for other software. The paper provides an overview of the solutions developed and implemented since 2015 and outlines future research plans.
    Type
    a
  8. Lund, B.D.; Agbaji, D.A.: What scheme do we prefer? : an examination of preference between Library of Congress and Dewey Decimal Classification among U.S.-based academic library employees (2018) 0.00
    0.0020506454 = product of:
      0.004101291 = sum of:
        0.004101291 = product of:
          0.008202582 = sum of:
            0.008202582 = weight(_text_:a in 4301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.008202582 = score(doc=4301,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 4301, 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=4301)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Though several studies have been published on the topic of reclassification of academic library collections over the past eight decades since it first gained popularity, none have explored the preferences of academic library employees toward classification schemes beyond a merely superficial level. The preferences of library employees must serve some role in organizational decision-making. By distributing a mixed-methods survey to academic library employees across the United States, the researchers in the present study provide insight into employee preferences. The findings of the study may provide insight into library trends and the future of library classification schemes.
    Type
    a
  9. Higgins, C.: Library of Congress Classification : Teddy Roosevelt's world in numbers? (2012) 0.00
    0.001913537 = product of:
      0.003827074 = sum of:
        0.003827074 = product of:
          0.007654148 = sum of:
            0.007654148 = weight(_text_:a in 1905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007654148 = score(doc=1905,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 1905, 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=1905)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    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.
    Type
    a
  10. Panigrahi, P.: Ranganathan and Dewey in hierarchical subject classification : some similarities (2015) 0.00
    0.001913537 = product of:
      0.003827074 = sum of:
        0.003827074 = product of:
          0.007654148 = sum of:
            0.007654148 = weight(_text_:a in 2789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007654148 = score(doc=2789,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 2789, 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=2789)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    S R Ranganathan and Melvil Dewey devised two types of classification schemes viz., faceted and enumerative. Ranganathan's faceted classification scheme is based on postulates, principles and canons. It has a strong theory. While working with the two schemes, similarities are observed. This paper tries to identify and present some relationships.
    Type
    a
  11. Svanberg, M.: Dewey in Sweden : leaving SAB after 87 years (2011) 0.00
    0.0016913437 = product of:
      0.0033826875 = sum of:
        0.0033826875 = product of:
          0.006765375 = sum of:
            0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 1804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006765375 = score(doc=1804,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1804, 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=1804)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Type
    a
  12. Slavic, A.; Davies, S.: Facet analysis in UDC : questions of structure, functionality and data formality (2017) 0.00
    0.0016913437 = product of:
      0.0033826875 = sum of:
        0.0033826875 = product of:
          0.006765375 = sum of:
            0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 3848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006765375 = score(doc=3848,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 3848, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3848)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The paper will look into different patterns of facet analysis used in the UDC schedules and how these affect the scheme presentation, the underlying data structure and the management of the classification scheme. From the very beginning, UDC was designed to represent the universe of knowledge as an integral whole allowing for subjects/concepts from all fields of knowledge to be combined, linked and the nature of their relationships made explicit. In Otlet's original design, the emphasis for his new type of classification was on the coordination of classmarks at the point of searching, i.e., post-coordination, which he firmly rooted in an expressive notational system. While some UDC classes exhibit various patterns of facet analytical theory proper, others, although used in an analytico-synthetic fashion, follow less canonical structural patterns. The authors highlight the lack of connection made throughout the various stages of UDC restructuring between: a) theoretical requirements of an overarching facet analytical theory as a founding principle guiding the construction of schedules; and, b) practical requirements for an analytico-synthetic classification in terms of notational presentation and data structure that enables its use in indexing and retrieval, as well as its management online.
    Type
    a
  13. Alex, H.: ¬Die Dewey-Dezimalklassifikation (DDC) (2018) 0.00
    0.001674345 = product of:
      0.00334869 = sum of:
        0.00334869 = product of:
          0.00669738 = sum of:
            0.00669738 = weight(_text_:a in 4338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.00669738 = score(doc=4338,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 4338, 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=4338)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Die Dewey-Dezimalklassifikation (DDC) ist die international am weitesten verbreitete bibliothekarische Klassifikation. Ursprünglich vor allem im anglo-amerikanischen Raum eingesetzt, ist sie heute aufgrund vieler Übersetzungen unter anderem auch in Europa - seit Erscheinen der deutschen Ausgabe auch im deutschsprachigen Raum - weit verbreitet. Die Schwerpunkte dieses Beitrags liegen zum einen auf dem Klassifikationssystem selbst, indem z. B. sein Aufbau und die Notationsvergabe erklärt werden, und zum anderen auf der DDC-Anwendung im deutschsprachigen Raum (u. a. Projekt DDC Deutsch, WebDewey Deutsch, Anwendung der DDC in der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek).
    Type
    a
  14. Lindpointner, R.: ¬Die Einführung der Dewey-Dezimalklassifikation (DDC) in der Oberösterreichischen Landesbibliothek (OÖLB) (2010) 0.00
    0.0014351527 = product of:
      0.0028703054 = sum of:
        0.0028703054 = product of:
          0.005740611 = sum of:
            0.005740611 = weight(_text_:a in 4378) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.005740611 = score(doc=4378,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = 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)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Location
    A
    Type
    a
  15. Lund, B.; Agbaji, D.: Use of Dewey Decimal Classification by academic libraries in the United States (2018) 0.00
    0.0011839407 = product of:
      0.0023678814 = sum of:
        0.0023678814 = product of:
          0.0047357627 = sum of:
            0.0047357627 = weight(_text_:a in 5181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0047357627 = score(doc=5181,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 5181, 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=5181)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Type
    a
  16. Zins, C.; Santos, P.L.V.A.C.: Mapping the knowledge covered by library classification systems (2011) 0.00
    0.0010148063 = product of:
      0.0020296127 = sum of:
        0.0020296127 = product of:
          0.0040592253 = sum of:
            0.0040592253 = weight(_text_:a in 4449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0040592253 = score(doc=4449,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 4449, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4449)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Type
    a