Search (26 results, page 1 of 2)

0.076164454 = product of:
  0.11424668 = sum of:
    0.0684437 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0684437 = score(doc=992,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
    0.045802977 = product of:
      0.091605954 = sum of:
        0.091605954 = weight(_text_:classification in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.091605954 = score(doc=992,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.5629819 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In relation to indexing, one of the chief implications of cognitive epistemology is the necessity for redefining knowledge representation concepts for information filing and retrieval purposes. Such a redefinition involves abandoning the traditional, hierarchical, closed-structure classification model. Considers the following in detail: a semiotic critique of classification principles; Ranganathan's classification theory; Ranganathan and cognitive epistemology; and some reflections on the DDC and the Bliss Bibliographic Classification

0.06722087 = product of:
  0.1008313 = sum of:
    0.0684437 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3527) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0684437 = score(doc=3527,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 3527, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3527)
    0.032387596 = product of:
      0.06477519 = sum of:
        0.06477519 = weight(_text_:classification in 3527) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06477519 = score(doc=3527,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.39808834 = fieldWeight in 3527, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3527)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Psychologists, philosophers and linguists analyse concepts and investigate their relationship to words. Concepts are also relevant to the issue of bibliographic classification, i.e. "catagorisation". Examines from a chronological point of view the various theories for the analysis and organisation of concepts ranging from the Vickery developed in 1954, to Austin's hypotheses, to Ranganathan's "fundamental categories" and the contribution made by CRG, the Classification Research Group. Illustrates other approaches to categorisation such as Farradane's (relationship between couples of concepts) and calls for a closer study of categories and concepts.

0.060896795 = product of:
  0.09134519 = sum of:
    0.0684437 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5516) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0684437 = score(doc=5516,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 5516, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5516)
    0.022901488 = product of:
      0.045802977 = sum of:
        0.045802977 = weight(_text_:classification in 5516) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045802977 = score(doc=5516,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 5516, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5516)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Bibliography' s claim to be a discipline is founded on its specific and exclusive concerns with knowledge organization structures and with the logical tools needed for indexing procedures. Discusses in a historical context the theoretical bases of bibliography, exploring such themes as the problems of author/reader communication and the abandonment of university accepted document classification criteria. Suggests that probably the only way to restore bibliographic communication is to adopt cognitive and regulatory 'maps' based on literary communication

0.05607769 = product of:
  0.08411653 = sum of:
    0.059888236 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059888236 = score(doc=2823,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 2823, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2823)
    0.024228299 = product of:
      0.048456598 = sum of:
        0.048456598 = weight(_text_:22 in 2823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048456598 = score(doc=2823,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = 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)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

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

0.029511403 = product of:
  0.088534206 = sum of:
    0.088534206 = sum of:
      0.040077604 = weight(_text_:classification in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040077604 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
      0.048456598 = weight(_text_:22 in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048456598 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3809, 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=3809)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In some areas of librarianship, such as cataloguing and subject classification, there are established rulebooks to guide librarians in their work. Information librarians however have no such aid; their metier is more an art than a profession, since reader queries may concern any aspect of human knowledge. After analysing hundreds of information library reader requests; G. Jahoda and colleagues have sought to formulate self-operating rules for interpreting such queries, utilising the 2 basic elements - what is 'known' and what is 'required' - contained in each request. Lists the categories into which each element breaks down. When presented in matrix form these can indicate the type of reference work to consult to resolve any reader queries

Date

6. 4.1996 13:22:31

0.028518207 = product of:
  0.08555462 = sum of:
    0.08555462 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08555462 = score(doc=2958,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.43012467 = fieldWeight in 2958, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2958)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The report aims to analyze the applicability of the Resource Description and Access (RDA) within the Italian public libraries, and also in the archives and museums in order to contribute to the discussion at international level. The Central Institute for the Union Catalogue of Italian libraries (ICCU) manages the online catalogue of the Italian libraries and the network of bibliographic services. ICCU has the institutional task of coordinating the cataloging and the documentation activities for the Italian libraries. On March 31 st 2014, the Institute signed the Agreement with the American Library Association,Publishing ALA, for the Italian translation rights of RDA, now available and published inRDAToolkit. The Italian translation has been carried out and realized by the Technical Working Group, made up of the main national and academic libraries, cultural Institutions and bibliographic agencies. The Group started working from the need of studying the new code in its textual detail, to better understand the principles, purposes, and applicability and finally its sustainability within the national context in relation to the area of the bibliographic control. At international level, starting from the publication of the Italian version of RDA and through the research carried out by ICCU and by the national Working Groups, the purpose is a more direct comparison with the experiences of the other European countries, also within EURIG international context, for an exchange of experiences aimed at strengthening the informational content of the data cataloging, with respect to history, cultural traditions and national identities of the different countries.

0.028231587 = product of:
  0.08469476 = sum of:
    0.08469476 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08469476 = score(doc=5737,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 5737, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5737)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Describes a proposed system for helping public library users, in praticular students, in their document searches. The system would directly involve users in compiling cards that indictae the various library sources (encyclopedias, books, newspapers, magazines, etc.) from which they retrieved bibliographic data. These cards would then be used to create a search path catalogue having 2 sections: general research topics; and keywords. Subsequently the librarian would form a database from this information. Such a system would not only benefit other researchers but also help the library to plan acquisition and rationalise its document arrangements. The scheme won 3rd prize in an open competition designated 'La biblioteca desiderata' (The kind of library we want), promoted jointly by the Milan Province Cultural Office and Biblioteche Oggi

Footnote

Übers. des Titels: Bibliographic search patterns

0.028231587 = product of:
  0.08469476 = sum of:
    0.08469476 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08469476 = score(doc=105,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 105, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=105)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Describes the origins and development to date of OLUC, the worldwide bibliographic database of OCLC launched by Ohio College in 1971. OLUC now has over 34m records, with publications in 400 languages. Aftere arly criticism of database accuracy, OCLC began quality improvement programmes in the 1990s, introducing the TechPro 'turnkey cataloguing' and Prompt-Cat acquisitions services. Explains how OLUC solved the 3 problems of duplicated records, sparse bibliographic data, and too many author and subject headings. OCLC has invested heavily in improving data quality, launching an authority control service in early 1996. Provides details of several cooperation programmes started by OCLC, e.g. Conser, USNP, NACO, Enhance and others

0.022814568 = product of:
  0.0684437 = sum of:
    0.0684437 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0684437 = score(doc=4647,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 4647, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4647)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

To enhance descriptions, cataloguers can add 'enriching' words or phrases to titles, or introduce content-enriched access features to aid subject-based research. Additional and natural language subject headings designed to support, though not replace, controlled language headings can result in enhanced indexing. Analytical cataloguing and double indexing are 2 other means by which readers can gian access to additional bibliographic data. Also examines how online research tool effectiveness can be enhanced by a system of automatic links between descriptors

0.019962747 = product of:
  0.059888236 = sum of:
    0.059888236 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 7872) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059888236 = score(doc=7872,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 7872, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7872)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Authority controls can be used somewhat differently in archive management from the way they are used in bibliographic management. This difference is formalised in the 1994 draft International Standard Archival Authority Rules for Coporate Bodies, Persons and Families, or ISAAR(CPF), now available to the archival profession for examining andtesting. Identifies 2 distict purposes for authority control in archives work: to establish a standard form for the heading of an authority record; and to provide a structure for separating contextual (provenance) descriptions from content descriptions. Illustrates how ISAAR(CPF) seeks to fulfil both these purposes, providing an example of family authority entry

0.019962747 = product of:
  0.059888236 = sum of:
    0.059888236 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059888236 = score(doc=109,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 109, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=109)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports an empirical study at the Queriniana Civic Library, Brescia, of interaction betwee researchers and printed catalogues during bibliographic data retrieval. The study sought to ascertain frequency of catalogue use; research success rate and time taken; and to identify user profiles. Data were obtained by a mixture of questionnaires, interviews and direct observation. Findings showed that 64% of the catalogue users were female; 70% were aged 19-30; 65% were university students or had good school grades; and hardly any were working class. University students preferred keyword access. 50% or all searches were successful. Most search failures related to subject catalogues, which usually required more time. Provides statistics on time spent in research

0.019962747 = product of:
  0.059888236 = sum of:
    0.059888236 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059888236 = score(doc=5435,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 5435, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5435)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Analyses 5 articles on subjects of bibliographic interest in the 1st ed. (1751-80) of Encyclopedie, now re-issued in facsimile form. The article headings (translated) are Bibliomane, Bibliomania, Librarian, Library, and Catalogue. The relevant authors include Diderot, d'Alembert and David, among others. By identifying likely sources, the analysis throws light on library science developments in the early 18th century. D'Alembert's contribution, in particular, contains the seeds of the modern view of what libraries ought not to be

0.017110925 = product of:
  0.05133277 = sum of:
    0.05133277 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2950) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05133277 = score(doc=2950,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 2950, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2950)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

RDA appears to be an hybrid standard: a list containing a high number of bibliographic elements and a rewrite - more formal than substantial - of cataloguing practices established with AACR2. In this document, RDA guidelines are analysed trying to compare them to the requirements of good cataloguing rules. Cataloguing rules in general shold not be an abstract and self-referential model but an effective tool to analyse and represent cultural phenomena, useful to qualified staff and helpful in learning about users need. From this point of view, RDA is quite disappointing: many relevant and frequent cataloguing issues are not mentioned at all, and cataloguing itself is left without real guidelines. A certain number of omissions, mistakes and individual flawness in the text should be modified by RDA board with a deep analysis of real cataloguing activities.

0.017110925 = product of:
  0.05133277 = sum of:
    0.05133277 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05133277 = score(doc=2959,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 2959, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2959)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

RIMMF software is grew out of the need to visualize and realize records according to the RDA guidelines. The article describes the software structure and features in the creation of a r­ball, that is a small database populated by recordings of bibliographic and authority resources enriched by relationships between and among entities involved. At first it's introduced the need that led to RIMMF outcome, then starts the software functional analysis. With a description of the main steps of the r-ball building, emphasizing the issues raised. The results highlights some critical aspects, but above all the wide scope of possible developments that open the Cultural Heritage Institutions horizon to the web prospective. Conclusions display the RDF-linked­data development of the RIMMF incoming future.

0.0161522 = product of:
  0.048456598 = sum of:
    0.048456598 = product of:
      0.096913196 = sum of:
        0.096913196 = weight(_text_:22 in 3477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.096913196 = score(doc=3477,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3477, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3477)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.013359202 = product of:
  0.040077604 = sum of:
    0.040077604 = product of:
      0.08015521 = sum of:
        0.08015521 = weight(_text_:classification in 3746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08015521 = score(doc=3746,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 3746, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3746)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Übers. d. Titels: Facet classification

0.01156941 = product of:
  0.034708228 = sum of:
    0.034708228 = product of:
      0.069416456 = sum of:
        0.069416456 = weight(_text_:classification in 4940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.069416456 = score(doc=4940,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 4940, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4940)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

A detailed examination of the UDC's history, function and future prospects. Among topics discussed are: the early pioneering work of P. Otlet and H. LaFontaine; the development of Colon Classification; the 'UDC versus switching language' debate in the 1970s; the FID standard reference code project; and the recent scheme by Williamson and McIlwaine to restructure UDC completely, converting it into a Colon Classification and also creating a thesaurus drawn from the same classification. Comments that UDC, far from being a 'prehistoric monster', is becoming a sort of test laboratory for developing new and interesting documentation structures

0.011450745 = product of:
  0.034352235 = sum of:
    0.034352235 = product of:
      0.06870447 = sum of:
        0.06870447 = weight(_text_:classification in 1680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06870447 = score(doc=1680,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 1680, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1680)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Übers. d. Titels: Classifying literature: the 800 class in Dewey Decimal Classification editions

0.011450745 = product of:
  0.034352235 = sum of:
    0.034352235 = product of:
      0.06870447 = sum of:
        0.06870447 = weight(_text_:classification in 3748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06870447 = score(doc=3748,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 3748, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3748)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Übers. d. Titels: Dewey decimal classification: edition update to DDC21

0.0094463825 = product of:
  0.028339146 = sum of:
    0.028339146 = product of:
      0.05667829 = sum of:
        0.05667829 = weight(_text_:classification in 4463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05667829 = score(doc=4463,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 4463, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4463)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Presents a rebuttal of criticisms of the Italian version of Dewey's 20th ed., which in the section relating to the geography of Italy was alleged to have expanded and updated Auxiliary Table 2 by using classification methods that resulted in errors in the location of some of the country's 8.000 communes (Bibliotecario 38(1993), 147-148). The debate focuses on aspects such as the numbering system of classification, the use of subdivisions, whether or not to list all communes,and the absence in Italy of an intermediate entity between province and commune