Search (3805 results, page 1 of 191)

  1. DeZelar-Tiedman, C.: Exploring user-contributed metadata's potential to enhance access to literary works (2011) 0.15 
    0.15462816 = product of:
  0.30925632 = sum of:
    0.30925632 = sum of:
      0.26557767 = weight(_text_:literary in 2595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.26557767 = score(doc=2595,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.7533431 = fieldWeight in 2595, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2595)
      0.04367864 = weight(_text_:22 in 2595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04367864 = score(doc=2595,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1881559 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2595, 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=2595)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Academic libraries have moved toward providing social networking features, such as tagging, in their library catalogs. To explore whether user tags can enhance access to individual literary works, the author obtained a sample of individual works of English and American literature from the twentieth and twenty-first centuries from a large academic library catalog and searched them in LibraryThing. The author compared match rates, the availability of subject headings and tags across various literary forms, and the terminology used in tags versus controlled-vocabulary headings on a subset of records. In addition, she evaluated the usefulness of available LibraryThing tags for the library catalog records that lacked subject headings. Options for utilizing the subject terms available in sources outside the local catalog also are discussed.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  2. Nistico, R.: Studio e indicizzazione delle dediche librarie (1998) 0.15 
    0.1519711 = product of:
  0.3039422 = sum of:
    0.3039422 = sum of:
      0.25298378 = weight(_text_:literary in 2823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.25298378 = score(doc=2823,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.71761906 = fieldWeight in 2823, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2823)
      0.050958417 = weight(_text_:22 in 2823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.050958417 = score(doc=2823,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1881559 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2823, 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=2823)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Book dedications by authors, often in verse form and appearing just before the title page, are one of the 6 elements describes by the French scholar Genette as paratextual. For some reasons dedications have failed to interest librarians, yet books containing them can be a valid object of bibliographic study, for the reasons that they carry special markings: are an example of a specific literary or semantic class; and reveal linguistic/stylistic features. Examines the history of literary dedications, citing examples by well-known writers, and suggests that cataloguing software should have a special field to record dedication
    Date
    22. 2.1999 20:41:06
  3. Vizine-Goetz, D.; Beall, J.: Using literary warrant to define a version of the DDC for automated classification services (2004) 0.15 
    0.1519711 = product of:
  0.3039422 = sum of:
    0.3039422 = sum of:
      0.25298378 = weight(_text_:literary in 2645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.25298378 = score(doc=2645,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.71761906 = fieldWeight in 2645, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2645)
      0.050958417 = weight(_text_:22 in 2645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.050958417 = score(doc=2645,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1881559 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2645, 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=2645)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This paper presents the results of an exploratory study to determine literary warrant for topics in electronic resources. The classification numbers in Abridged Edition 14 were used as a starting point. Using the principles of abridgment and expansion in Dewey, a version of the DDC is defined that accommodates the topics found an three diverse Web sites that use Dewey: BUBL, Canadian Information By Subject, and KidsClick! The resulting classes are used to create a database for automated classification of Web resources.
    Object
    DDC-22
  4. MacEwan, A.: Promoting fiction through the catalogue (1997) 0.11 
    0.11492248 = product of:
  0.22984496 = sum of:
    0.22984496 = sum of:
      0.17888655 = weight(_text_:literary in 5843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.17888655 = score(doc=5843,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.5074333 = fieldWeight in 5843, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5843)
      0.050958417 = weight(_text_:22 in 5843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.050958417 = score(doc=5843,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1881559 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5843, 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=5843)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Considers the recent trend towards the promotion, by public libraries, of literary fiction with particular reference to a new fiction initiative by the British Library which seeks to redress the imbalance between the level of access provided for fiction and non fiction in library catalogues. From January 1997, the BNB catalogue records for works of fiction will be indexed using the LCSH in conjunction with a range of genre and form headings derived from the American Library Association' Guidelines on Subject Access to Individual Works on Fiction, Drama etc. (GSAFD). Access provided by the GSAFD approach encompass access by genre and access by subject
    Source
    Librarians world. 6(1997) no.2, S.22-24
  5. Ranganathan, S.R.: Classification and communication (2006) 0.11 
    0.11492248 = product of:
  0.22984496 = sum of:
    0.22984496 = sum of:
      0.17888655 = weight(_text_:literary in 1469) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.17888655 = score(doc=1469,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.5074333 = fieldWeight in 1469, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1469)
      0.050958417 = weight(_text_:22 in 1469) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.050958417 = score(doc=1469,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1881559 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1469, 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=1469)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Inhalt: Part I ---Classification and Its Evolution 11. First sense --Primitive use 12. Second sense---Common use 13. Third sense--- Library classification 14. Field of knowledge 15. Enumerative classification 16. Analytico-synthetic classification 17. Uses of analytico-synthetic classification 18. Depth -classification --Confession of a faith Part 2---Communication 21. Co-operative living 22. Communication and language 23. Commercial contact 24. Political understanding 25. Literary exchange 26. Spiritual communion 27. Cultural concord 28. Intellectual team -work Part 3---Classification and Its Future 31. Domains in communication 32. Domain of classification 33. Time-and Space-Facets 34. Preliminary schedules 35. Energy-Facet 36. Matter-Facet 37. Personality -Facet 38. Research and Organisation
  6. Hotho, A.; Bloehdorn, S.: Data Mining 2004 : Text classification by boosting weak learners based on terms and concepts (2004) 0.11 
    0.10717797 = sum of:
  0.08533865 = product of:
    0.25601596 = sum of:
      0.25601596 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.25601596 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.4555298 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.02183932 = product of:
    0.04367864 = sum of:
      0.04367864 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04367864 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1881559 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Vgl.: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.91.4940%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ei=dOXrUMeIDYHDtQahsIGACg&usg=AFQjCNHFWVh6gNPvnOrOS9R3rkrXCNVD-A&sig2=5I2F5evRfMnsttSgFF9g7Q&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.Yms.
    Date
    8. 1.2013 10:22:32
  7. Cullars, J.: Citation characteristics of French and German literary monographs (1989) 0.10 
    0.102220885 = product of:
  0.20444177 = sum of:
    0.20444177 = product of:
      0.40888354 = sum of:
        0.40888354 = weight(_text_:literary in 2985) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.40888354 = score(doc=2985,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05373074 = queryNorm
            1.1598475 = fieldWeight in 2985, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2985)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  8. Miall, D.S.: Personal Librarian : a tool for the literature classroom (1990) 0.10 
    0.102220885 = product of:
  0.20444177 = sum of:
    0.20444177 = product of:
      0.40888354 = sum of:
        0.40888354 = weight(_text_:literary in 3225) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.40888354 = score(doc=3225,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05373074 = queryNorm
            1.1598475 = fieldWeight in 3225, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3225)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Literary and linguistic computing. 5(1990) no.1, S.19-23
  9. Kammer, M.: WordCruncher: problems of multilingual usage (1989) 0.10 
    0.102220885 = product of:
  0.20444177 = sum of:
    0.20444177 = product of:
      0.40888354 = sum of:
        0.40888354 = weight(_text_:literary in 3236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.40888354 = score(doc=3236,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05373074 = queryNorm
            1.1598475 = fieldWeight in 3236, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3236)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Literary and linguistic computing. 4(1989) no.2, S.135-140
  10. Luhn, H.P.: ¬A statistical approach to the mechanical encoding and searching of literary information (1957) 0.10 
    0.102220885 = product of:
  0.20444177 = sum of:
    0.20444177 = product of:
      0.40888354 = sum of:
        0.40888354 = weight(_text_:literary in 5453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.40888354 = score(doc=5453,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05373074 = queryNorm
            1.1598475 = fieldWeight in 5453, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5453)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  11. Paling, S.: Developing a metadata element set for organizing literary works : a survey of the American literary community (2011) 0.10 
    0.10141915 = product of:
  0.2028383 = sum of:
    0.2028383 = product of:
      0.4056766 = sum of:
        0.4056766 = weight(_text_:literary in 4554) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.4056766 = score(doc=4554,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05373074 = queryNorm
            1.1507506 = fieldWeight in 4554, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4554)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Various approaches have been taken to organizing literary works, but finding the most effective set of metadata elements remains an unfinished task. This paper focuses on exploring five inductively built sets for organizing new literary works for discovery by members of the American literary community. The sets feature potential metadata elements drawn from a variety of sources, including present and proposed systems, as well as prior theoretical work. The paper describes a survey study that asked members of the American literary community for input about what potential metadata elements they would be likely to use to aid the process of discovering new literary work. The paper discusses the results for each set and discusses possibilities for a new set that combines the most desirable metadata elements from each of the separate sets.
  12. Bagheri, M.: Development of thesauri in Iran (2006) 0.10 
    0.09850498 = product of:
  0.19700997 = sum of:
    0.19700997 = sum of:
      0.15333132 = weight(_text_:literary in 260) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15333132 = score(doc=260,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.4349428 = fieldWeight in 260, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=260)
      0.04367864 = weight(_text_:22 in 260) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04367864 = score(doc=260,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1881559 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 260, 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=260)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The need for Persian thesauri became apparent during the late 1960s with the advent of documentation centres in Iran. The first Persian controlled vocabulary was published by IRANDOC in 1977. Other centres worked on translations of existing thesauri, but it was soon realised that these efforts did not meet the needs of the centres. After the Islamic revolution in 1979, the foundation of new centres intensified the need for Persian thesauri, especially in the fields of history and government documents. Also, during the Iran-Iraq war, Iranian research centres produced reports in scientific and technical fields, both to support military requirements and to meet society's needs. In order to provide a comprehensive thesaurus, the Council of Scientific Research of Iran approved a project for the compilation of such a work. Nowadays, 12 Persian thesauri are available and others are being prepared, based on the literary corpus and conformity with characteristics of Iranian culture.
    Source
    Indexer. 25(2006) no.1, S.19-22
  13. Stamatatos, E.: ¬A survey of modern authorship attribution methods (2009) 0.10 
    0.09850498 = product of:
  0.19700997 = sum of:
    0.19700997 = sum of:
      0.15333132 = weight(_text_:literary in 2741) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15333132 = score(doc=2741,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.4349428 = fieldWeight in 2741, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2741)
      0.04367864 = weight(_text_:22 in 2741) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04367864 = score(doc=2741,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1881559 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2741, 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=2741)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Authorship attribution supported by statistical or computational methods has a long history starting from the 19th century and is marked by the seminal study of Mosteller and Wallace (1964) on the authorship of the disputed Federalist Papers. During the last decade, this scientific field has been developed substantially, taking advantage of research advances in areas such as machine learning, information retrieval, and natural language processing. The plethora of available electronic texts (e.g., e-mail messages, online forum messages, blogs, source code, etc.) indicates a wide variety of applications of this technology, provided it is able to handle short and noisy text from multiple candidate authors. In this article, a survey of recent advances of the automated approaches to attributing authorship is presented, examining their characteristics for both text representation and text classification. The focus of this survey is on computational requirements and settings rather than on linguistic or literary issues. We also discuss evaluation methodologies and criteria for authorship attribution studies and list open questions that will attract future work in this area.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 17:44:32
  14. Rafferty, P.: Genette, intertextuality, and knowledge organization (2014) 0.10 
    0.09850498 = product of:
  0.19700997 = sum of:
    0.19700997 = sum of:
      0.15333132 = weight(_text_:literary in 1445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15333132 = score(doc=1445,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.4349428 = fieldWeight in 1445, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1445)
      0.04367864 = weight(_text_:22 in 1445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04367864 = score(doc=1445,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1881559 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1445, 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=1445)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Recent approaches to KO have explored the notion of intertextuality and considered ways in which such abstract concepts derived from literary theory might form the foundation for the design of novel and rich information retrieval systems. In this paper, the notion of intertextuality is examined, and its use by knowledge organization researchers explored. Gerard Genette's work in particular has been used with some success to map out the possibilities offered by applying the concept of intertextuality to the design of information retrieval systems. The paper will examine some KO systems which reveal the traces of intertextual poetics in their design, including the FRBR model which in its mapping of intertextuality, articulates some of Genette's categories while stopping short of actualising the more subjective and interpretative categories. The paper concludes with speculation about whether and how these categories might be accommodated in a Web 2.0 interactive digital bibliosphere.
    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
  15. Mitrevsky, G.: On the functionality of text-based management systems for literary research (1989) 0.09 
    0.09035135 = product of:
  0.1807027 = sum of:
    0.1807027 = product of:
      0.3614054 = sum of:
        0.3614054 = weight(_text_:literary in 5708) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3614054 = score(doc=5708,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05373074 = queryNorm
            1.0251701 = fieldWeight in 5708, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5708)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Discusses the problems facing designers of data base management systems for full text data bases of literary materials
  16. Kaushik, S.K.: DDC 22 : a practical approach (2004) 0.09 
    0.089631386 = product of:
  0.17926277 = sum of:
    0.17926277 = sum of:
      0.102220885 = weight(_text_:literary in 1842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.102220885 = score(doc=1842,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.28996187 = fieldWeight in 1842, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1842)
      0.07704189 = weight(_text_:22 in 1842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07704189 = score(doc=1842,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.1881559 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05373074 = queryNorm
          0.4094577 = fieldWeight in 1842, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1842)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    A system of library classification that flashed across the inquiring mind of young Melvil Louis Kossuth Dewey (known as Melvil Dewey) in 1873 is still the most popular classification scheme.. The modern library classification begins with Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC). Melvil Dewey devised DDC in 1876. DDC has is credit of 128 years of boudless success. The DDC is being taught as a practical subject throughout the world and it is being used in majority of libraries in about 150 countries. This is the result of continuous revision that 22nd Edition of DDC has been published in July 2003. No other classification scheme has published so many editions. Some welcome changes have been made in DDC 22. To reduce the Christian bias in 200 religion, the numbers 201 to 209 have been devoted to specific aspects of religion. In the previous editions these numbers were devoted to Christianity. to enhance the classifier's efficiency, Table 7 has been removed from DDC 22 and the provision of adding group of persons is made by direct use of notation already available in schedules and in notation -08 from Table 1 Standard Subdivision. The present book is an attempt to explain, with suitable examples, the salient provisions of DDC 22. The book is written in simple language so that the students may not face any difficulty in understanding what is being explained. The examples in the book are explained in a step-by-step procedure. It is hoped that this book will prove of great help and use to the library professionals in general and library and information science students in particular.
    Content
    1. Introduction to DDC 22 2. Major changes in DDC 22 3. Introduction to the schedules 4. Use of Table 1 : Standard Subdivisions 5. Use of Table 2 : Areas 6. Use of Table 3 : Subdivisions for the arts, for individual literatures, for specific literary forms 7. Use to Table 4 : Subdivisions of individual languages and language families 8. Use of Table 5 : Ethic and National groups 9. Use of Table 6 : Languages 10. Treatment of Groups of Persons
    Object
    DDC-22
  17. Schnelling, H.M.: Data analysis in literary studies (1990) 0.09 
    0.089443274 = product of:
  0.17888655 = sum of:
    0.17888655 = product of:
      0.3577731 = sum of:
        0.3577731 = weight(_text_:literary in 859) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3577731 = score(doc=859,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05373074 = queryNorm
            1.0148666 = fieldWeight in 859, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=859)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  18. Fought, J.; Wesler, M.; Davenport, H.: Extending SGML concurrent structures : toward computer readable meta-dictionaries (1993) 0.09 
    0.089443274 = product of:
  0.17888655 = sum of:
    0.17888655 = product of:
      0.3577731 = sum of:
        0.3577731 = weight(_text_:literary in 7100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3577731 = score(doc=7100,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05373074 = queryNorm
            1.0148666 = fieldWeight in 7100, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7100)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Literary and linguistic computing. 8(1993) no.1, S.33-38
  19. Segal, E.: ¬The Britannica and its dongle (1994) 0.09 
    0.089443274 = product of:
  0.17888655 = sum of:
    0.17888655 = product of:
      0.3577731 = sum of:
        0.3577731 = weight(_text_:literary in 8769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3577731 = score(doc=8769,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05373074 = queryNorm
            1.0148666 = fieldWeight in 8769, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8769)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Times Literary Supplement. 1994, Nov. 18th, S.7
  20. Aikawa, H. (Bearb.): Guidelines on subject access to individual works of fiction, drama, etc. (2000) 0.09 
    0.089443274 = product of:
  0.17888655 = sum of:
    0.17888655 = product of:
      0.3577731 = sum of:
        0.3577731 = weight(_text_:literary in 176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3577731 = score(doc=176,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.35253215 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05373074 = queryNorm
            1.0148666 = fieldWeight in 176, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=176)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    LCSH
    Subject headings / Literary form
    Literary form
    Subject
    Subject headings / Literary form
    Literary form

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

  • a 3189
  • m 358
  • el 165
  • s 145
  • b 39
  • x 35
  • i 23
  • r 17
  • ? 9
  • n 4
  • p 4
  • d 3
  • u 2
  • z 2
  • au 1
  • h 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications