Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.012586337 = product of:
  0.03775901 = sum of:
    0.03775901 = product of:
      0.07551802 = sum of:
        0.07551802 = weight(_text_:librarians in 907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07551802 = score(doc=907,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.3464393 = fieldWeight in 907, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=907)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In the Netherlands dissatisfaction with the classification schedules and subject indexing headings assigned to records by the National Bibliographic Service has led librarians to re-arrange their collections in broad reader-interest categories. With the introduction of online public catalogues in libraries and their provision of multiple entry terms for each item, the problems of conflictions in shelf location are largely eliminated. The internal layout of each library may place constraints on such radical reorganisation. Howver, the merging of the children's and adults' sections can be useful in offering children a greater depth of knowledge. A further useful arrangement may be the combination of fiction and non-fiction collections in broad subject catalogues

0.012586337 = product of:
  0.03775901 = sum of:
    0.03775901 = product of:
      0.07551802 = sum of:
        0.07551802 = weight(_text_:librarians in 1524) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07551802 = score(doc=1524,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.3464393 = fieldWeight in 1524, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1524)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

United States libraries use classification to provide subject browsing in open stacks. The DDC used by 85% of American libraries, is a theoretical, universal attempt to organize all knowledge. The LCC lacks intellectual consistency since it was based upon library warrant to organize materials in one collection. Many academic libraries use LCC because the Library of Congress' shared bibliographic records with the LCC call numbers reflect the collecting interests of academic libraries. LCC is more hospitable to change than DDC whoese phoenix schedules have encountered resistance throughout the world. Classification currently receives less attention than subject headings since United States librarians place great hope in the computer to resolve subject heading problems while remaining conservative about classification

0.01078829 = product of:
  0.032364868 = sum of:
    0.032364868 = product of:
      0.064729735 = sum of:
        0.064729735 = weight(_text_:librarians in 828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.064729735 = score(doc=828,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.296948 = fieldWeight in 828, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=828)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Provides an overview of the installation of electrically and mechanically assisted compact shelving and procedures for relocating over 2.000 linear feet of books, scores, recordings and manuscripts, prior to, during and after installation of such a system at Bowling Green State University (BGSU), Ohio, USA. In the light of concern expressed by librarians that patrons would be dissatisfied with the accompanying restrictions such as reduced browsing capability, slow retrieval, and their need to obtain instruction in operating the shelving, a survey was conducted among graduate and undergraduate students to ascertain their views of electric compact shelving for books and scores in the Music Library of Sound Recordings Archives of BGSU Libraries. The survey identified: apprehension concerning the use of the installation; the adequacy of instructions for use; the level of inconvenience / delay in accessing material; overall satisfaction; and the positive and negative features of the installation

0.01078829 = product of:
  0.032364868 = sum of:
    0.032364868 = product of:
      0.064729735 = sum of:
        0.064729735 = weight(_text_:librarians in 4702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.064729735 = score(doc=4702,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.296948 = fieldWeight in 4702, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4702)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Examines the events which led the Swedish Library Association (SAB) in 1921 to publish a unique Swedish classification system, the SAB system. Its origin is set in the social context of public library development since 1800 and seen in the light of Bostrom's philosophy of rational idealism. This had consequences for stock and classification practice in parish, workers' and study circle libraries. From 1915, SAB began debating classification at annual meetings and in the committee set up in 1917. Library consultants played a major role in the system's development; ahich was created for librarians, not users. The main reason for creating a unique system seems to have been a desire to find a common tool for stock acquisition and organisation which was based on Swedish practice and would function in the Swedish setting. This might explain why Dewey, based on American public library ideas, was rejected. But the picture is complex and can be differently interpretated

0.008790895 = product of:
  0.026372686 = sum of:
    0.026372686 = product of:
      0.052745372 = sum of:
        0.052745372 = weight(_text_:22 in 4494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052745372 = score(doc=4494,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4494, 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=4494)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

BibliotheekBlad. 2(1998) no.10/11, S.22-24

0.0032965858 = product of:
  0.009889757 = sum of:
    0.009889757 = product of:
      0.019779515 = sum of:
        0.019779515 = weight(_text_:22 in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019779515 = score(doc=1786,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 1786, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1786)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 3.2008 17:56:19