Search (15 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"McIlwaine, I.C."
  1. McIlwaine, I.C.: Universal Bibliographic Control and the quest for a universally acceptable subject arrangement (2010) 0.03
    0.026332382 = product of:
      0.052664764 = sum of:
        0.052664764 = product of:
          0.10532953 = sum of:
            0.10532953 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10532953 = score(doc=3567,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.5959982 = fieldWeight in 3567, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, 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.
  2. McIlwaine, I.C.: Section on Classification and Indexing : review of activities 1999-2000 (2000) 0.02
    0.02280451 = product of:
      0.04560902 = sum of:
        0.04560902 = product of:
          0.09121804 = sum of:
            0.09121804 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09121804 = score(doc=5409,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.5161496 = fieldWeight in 5409, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5409)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Footnote
    Vortrag, IFLA General Conference, Divison IV Bibliographic Control, Jerusalem, 2000
  3. McIlwaine, I.C.; Williamson, N.J.: Class 61 - Medicine : restructuring progress 2000 (2000) 0.02
    0.021526773 = product of:
      0.043053545 = sum of:
        0.043053545 = product of:
          0.08610709 = sum of:
            0.08610709 = weight(_text_:22 in 1012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08610709 = score(doc=1012,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 1012, 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=1012)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Extensions and corrections to the UDC. 22(2000), S.49-75
  4. McIlwaine, I.C.: Present role and future policy for UDC as a standard for subject control (1991) 0.02
    0.0152030075 = product of:
      0.030406015 = sum of:
        0.030406015 = product of:
          0.06081203 = sum of:
            0.06081203 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 7934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06081203 = score(doc=7934,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 7934, 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=7934)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Standards for the international exchange of bibliographic information: papers presented at a course held at the School of Library, Archive and Information Studies, University College, London, 3-18 August 1990. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  5. McIlwaine, I.C.: UDC: the present state and future developments (1994) 0.02
    0.0152030075 = product of:
      0.030406015 = sum of:
        0.030406015 = product of:
          0.06081203 = sum of:
            0.06081203 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06081203 = score(doc=2635,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 2635, 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=2635)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 23(1994) no.5, S.29-33
  6. McIlwaine, I.C.; Williamson, N.J.: International trends in subject analysis research (1999) 0.02
    0.0152030075 = product of:
      0.030406015 = sum of:
        0.030406015 = product of:
          0.06081203 = sum of:
            0.06081203 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06081203 = score(doc=4117,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 4117, 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=4117)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This paper describes a survey of subject analysis research over the ten year period 1988 to 1998. Data are drawn from the 'research environment' encompassing publications, conference papers, major bibliographic resources in the field of Library and Information Science and selective searches of the Internet. Findings reveal major and minor areas of research activity. Trends and developments are identified and conclusions drawn. Strengths and weaknesses in the approaches taken to subject analysis research are discussed and suggestions for improvements are made with a view to future research directions
  7. McIlwaine, I.C.: ¬A feasibility study on the restructuring of the Universal Decimal Classification into a fully-facetd classification system (1994) 0.01
    0.013302632 = product of:
      0.026605263 = sum of:
        0.026605263 = product of:
          0.053210527 = sum of:
            0.053210527 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 7738) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053210527 = score(doc=7738,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 7738, 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=7738)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    An exploratory and experimental study for the purpose of testing a methodology which might be used to restructure the UDC class by class. The study uses the facet framework established in the Bliss Bibliographic Classification, 2nd ed., as the basis for the restructuring and the research is being carried out using the discipline 'medical sciences'. A thesaurus will be derived from the restructured scheme which will act as an index to it. In a broader context this research is an attempt to see how far it is possible to take the knowledge base of one classification scheme and impose the structure of another scheme on it
  8. McIlwaine, I.C.: Trends in knowledge organization research (2003) 0.01
    0.012301013 = product of:
      0.024602026 = sum of:
        0.024602026 = product of:
          0.04920405 = sum of:
            0.04920405 = weight(_text_:22 in 2289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04920405 = score(doc=2289,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2289, 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=2289)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    10. 6.2004 19:22:56
  9. McIlwaine, I.C.: Interdisciplinarity : a new retrieval problem? (2000) 0.01
    0.011402255 = product of:
      0.02280451 = sum of:
        0.02280451 = product of:
          0.04560902 = sum of:
            0.04560902 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04560902 = score(doc=124,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 124, 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=124)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Cross-fertilization between disciplines is held to be a new phenomenon. This is not really the case, but what is new is the availability of vast quantities of information that crosses disciplinary boundaries and is unorganized on the WWW. Browsability is no longer an option in the same way it has been in the past and new methods have to be devised for accessing information. Rather than abandoning the tried and tested, it is suggested that a more practical approach might be to redesign existing tools, i.e. bibliographic classifications for this purpose. Two interdisciplinary fields of study, Tourism and Environmental Science, have recently been revised in the Universal Decimal Classification, in an attempt to make the scheme more appropriate for the needs of the twenty-first century.
  10. McIlwaine, I.C.: Classification schemes : consultation with users and cooperation between editors (1997) 0.01
    0.011402255 = product of:
      0.02280451 = sum of:
        0.02280451 = product of:
          0.04560902 = sum of:
            0.04560902 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04560902 = score(doc=5610,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 5610, 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=5610)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Recent developments in the improvement of communication between those responsible for editing the general schemes of classification and their users are outlined. Increased participation in conferences, the publication of guides and manuals for aiding the implementation of general classifications, and the use of the Internet as a means of communicating are all ways in which users hear more about these schemes and can make their views known to those responsible for maintaining them. Increased communication at editorial level, including coordination of current developments and future revisions, is discussed. The Dewey Decimal Classification, the Library of Congress Classification, the Universal Decimal Classification, and the Bliss Bibliographic Classification (BC2) are reviewed and the ways in which each communicates with its users and participates in joint enterprises are noted.
  11. McIlwaine, I.C.: UDC: the present state and future prospects (1995) 0.01
    0.010763386 = product of:
      0.021526773 = sum of:
        0.021526773 = product of:
          0.043053545 = sum of:
            0.043053545 = weight(_text_:22 in 1899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043053545 = score(doc=1899,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1899, 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=1899)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 22(1995) no.2, S.64-69
  12. McIlwaine, I.C.: ¬The Universal Decimal Classification : some factors concerning its origins, development, and influence (1997) 0.01
    0.00950188 = product of:
      0.01900376 = sum of:
        0.01900376 = product of:
          0.03800752 = sum of:
            0.03800752 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03800752 = score(doc=141,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 141, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=141)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Outlines the bibliographic enterprise envisaged by Otlet and LaFontaine, which resulted in the UDC being developed in 1895, and the subsequent history of the scheme. Relationship with DDC from which it was derived deteriorated in the early 20th century and changes in funding, location, and editorship of Duyvis from 1929-59 had a profound effect on the scheme's development and management. Lloyd, Duyvis successor, reformed the revision structure, and further management changes from 1975 to the present day, culminated in the formation of the UDC Consortium in 1992. Notes the subsequent creation of a machine-readable Master Reference File and speedier revision procedures. Examines the scheme's structure, development, and influence on classification theory, problems caused by longevity and lack of standrad procedures, and highlights proposals for their reform to improve the scheme's suitability for an automated world. Explores research projects in 1960s which foreshadowed possibilities today, such as a complementary thesaurus and individualisation of single concepts notationally. Emphasizes the value of classification in a multilingual environment and outlines the future developments
  13. McIlwaine, I.C.: Brian Vickery : 11th September 1918-17 th October 2009 (2010) 0.01
    0.0076881335 = product of:
      0.015376267 = sum of:
        0.015376267 = product of:
          0.030752534 = sum of:
            0.030752534 = weight(_text_:22 in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030752534 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3692, 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=3692)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2010 19:32:06
  14. McIlwaine, I.C.; Broughton, V.: ¬The Classification Research Group : then and now (2000) 0.01
    0.0076015037 = product of:
      0.0152030075 = sum of:
        0.0152030075 = product of:
          0.030406015 = sum of:
            0.030406015 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030406015 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.17204987 = fieldWeight in 6089, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=6089)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The genesis of the Group: In 1948, as part of the post-war renewal of library services in the United Kingdom, the Royal Society organized a Conference on Scientific Information.' What, at the time, must have seemed a minute part of the grand plan, but was later to have a transforming effect on the theory of knowledge organization throughout the remainder of the century, was the setting up of a standing committee of a small group of specialists to investigate the organization and retrieval of scientific information. In 1950, the secretary of that committee, J.D. Bernal, suggested that it might be appropriate to ask a group of librarians to do a study of the problem. After a couple of years of informal discussion it was agreed, in February 1952, to form a Classification Research Group - the CRG as it has become known to subsequent generations. The Group published a brief corporate statement of its views in the Library Association Record in June 1953 and submitted a memorandum to the Library Association Research Committee in May 1955, entitled "The need for a faceted classification as the basis of all methods of information retrieval". This memorandum was published in the proceedings of what has become known as the "Dorking Conference" in 1957. Of the original fifteen members, four still belong to the Group, three of whom are in regular attendance: Eric Coates, Douglas Foskett and Jack Mills. Brian Vickery ceased attending regularly in the 1960s but has retained his interest in their doings: he was present at the 150th celebratory meeting in 1984 and played an active part in the "Dorking revisited" conference held in 1997. The stated aim of the Group was 'To review the basic principles of bibliographic classification, unhampered by allegiance to any particular published scheme' and it can truly be stated that the work of its members has had a fundamental influence on the teaching and practice of information retrieval. It is paradoxical that this collection of people has exerted such a strong theoretical sway because their aims were from the outset and remain essentially practical. This fact is sometimes overlooked in the literature on knowledge organization: there is a tendency to get carried away, and for researchers of today to concentrate so hard on what might be that they overlook what is needed, useful and practical - the entire objective of any retrieval system.
  15. McIlwaine, I.C.: Where have all the flowers gone? : An investigation into the fate of some special classification schemes (2003) 0.01
    0.0076015037 = product of:
      0.0152030075 = sum of:
        0.0152030075 = product of:
          0.030406015 = sum of:
            0.030406015 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030406015 = score(doc=2764,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.17204987 = fieldWeight in 2764, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2764)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Prior to the OPAC many institutions devised classifications to suit their special needs. Others expanded or altered general schemes to accommodate specific approaches. A driving force in the creation of these classifications was the Classification Research Group, celebrating its golden jubilee in 2002, whose work created a framework and body of principles that remain valid for the retrieval needs of today. The paper highlights some of these special schemes and highlights the fundamental principles which remain valid. 1. Introduction The distinction between a general and a special classification scheme is made frequently in the textbooks, but is one that it is sometimes difficult to draw. The Library of Congress classification could be described as the special classification par excellence. Normally, however, a special classification is taken to be one that is restricted to a specific subject, and quite often used in one specific context only, either a library or a bibliographic listing or for a specific purpose such as a search engine and it is in this sense that I propose to examine some of these schemes. Today, there is a widespread preference for searching an words as a supplement to the use of a standard system, usually the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC). This is enhanced by the ability to search documents full-text in a computerized environment, a situation that did not exist 20 or 30 years ago. Today's situation is a great improvement in many ways, but it does depend upon the words used by the author and the searcher corresponding, and often presupposes the use of English. In libraries, the use of co-operative services and precatalogued records already provided with classification data has also spelt the demise of the special scheme. In many instances, the survival of a special classification depends upon its creaior and, with the passage of time, this becomes inevitably more precarious.