Search (54 results, page 1 of 3)

0.043925878 = product of:
  0.087851755 = sum of:
    0.06615191 = weight(_text_:libraries in 1151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06615191 = score(doc=1151,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.4400543 = fieldWeight in 1151, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1151)
    0.021699846 = product of:
      0.04339969 = sum of:
        0.04339969 = weight(_text_:22 in 1151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04339969 = score(doc=1151,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045760795 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1151, 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=1151)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

A summary of a survey of the use of the DDC in libraries of the United States and Canada is presented. (5% of alle libraries in the United States and Canada use DDC; of these are at least 75% use the most recent full or abridges edition. Librarians wish to have DDC revised continuously, but they do not want the meanings of numbers changed. Any assistance that can be provided in the application of DDC is welcome. Most of the larger libraries do not believe zhat the current index provides sufficient assistance. Divisions needing revision are listed with an index number reflecting priority. DDC is seen to be warmly regarded by librarians in general and by public service librarians in particular

Source

Library resources and technical services. 22(1978), S.402-408

0.04278048 = product of:
  0.08556096 = sum of:
    0.05456118 = weight(_text_:libraries in 4594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05456118 = score(doc=4594,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.36295068 = fieldWeight in 4594, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4594)
    0.03099978 = product of:
      0.06199956 = sum of:
        0.06199956 = weight(_text_:22 in 4594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06199956 = score(doc=4594,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045760795 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4594, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4594)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Imprint

Littleton, Colo. : Libraries Unlimited

Object

DDC-22

0.037658602 = product of:
  0.075317204 = sum of:
    0.03780109 = weight(_text_:libraries in 3629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03780109 = score(doc=3629,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.2514596 = fieldWeight in 3629, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3629)
    0.037516117 = product of:
      0.075032234 = sum of:
        0.075032234 = weight(_text_:europe in 3629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.075032234 = score(doc=3629,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2787329 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045760795 = queryNorm
            0.26919046 = fieldWeight in 3629, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3629)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Toward the end of the nineteenth century, Paul Otlet and Henri LaFontaine of Belgium initiated the compilation of an index to all recorded knowledge. Instead of an alphabetical file, they decided to adopt a classified arrangement. For the basis of such an arrangement, they turned to the Dewey Decimal Classification, a system which was gaining wide acceptance in American libraries. With permission secured from Melvil Dewey to expand the system to include details required for an indexing tool, Otlet and LaFontaine began developing what was to become the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC). Following the establishment of the Institut International de Bibliographie (IIB), later the Fédération Internationale de Documentation (FID), in 1895, work an the universal index and the classification scheme proceeded under its aegis. In 1905, the classification scheme was published as the Manuel du Répertoire bibliographique universel. While the initial, ambitious project of the universal index was abandoned, the classification scheme itself was widely adopted, particularly in special libraries in Europe. A second edition was published in 1927-1933 under the title Classification décimale universelle. The development and maintanance of the scheme continued with the support of the FID. In the course of its development, the UDC moved further and further away from its prototype, the Dewey Decimal Classification. One of the major differences between the two systems is the use of relators in UDC. The notation adopted by Melvil Dewey for his scheme is a hierarchical one; in other words, the notation reflects the hierarchical relationships among subjects. However, it does not display the relationships among the facets, or aspects, of a particular subject. Furthermore, the use of auxiliaries in the Dewey Decimal Classification, beginning with the form subdivisions and gradually expanding to include geographic subdivisions and finally other auxiliaries in the most recent editions, has been relatively restricted. As an indexing tool, Otlet and LaFontaine felt that their system needed commonly applicable auxiliaries which they called "determinatives."` To this end, a series of special symbols were introduced into the system for the purpose of combining related subjects and indicating different facets or aspects of the main subject. The use of these symbols, called relators, with the auxiliaries has rendered the Universal Decimal Classification a synthetic scheme. In this respect, the UDC has moved much more rapidly than the Dewey Decimal Classification toward becoming a faceted classification. In the following paper, Henry V. Hopwood, a Senior Assistant at the British Patent Office Library during the 1900s, explains the use and rationale of relators, or "marks," as he calls them, in the Universal Decimal Classification.

Imprint

Littleton, CO : Libraries Unlimited

0.037658602 = product of:
  0.075317204 = sum of:
    0.03780109 = weight(_text_:libraries in 1736) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03780109 = score(doc=1736,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.2514596 = fieldWeight in 1736, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1736)
    0.037516117 = product of:
      0.075032234 = sum of:
        0.075032234 = weight(_text_:europe in 1736) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.075032234 = score(doc=1736,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2787329 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045760795 = queryNorm
            0.26919046 = fieldWeight in 1736, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1736)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to present a general overview with up-to-date information on the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) use worldwide. Design/methodology/approach - The research combined e-mail interviews with LIS professionals in 208 countries, literature research and information obtained from UDC distributors/publishers (AENOR, BSI, UDC Consortium). The following categorisation of UDC use was offered: A - dominant system; B - used in some kind of libraries only; or C - rarely used. Findings - The paper finds that, of the 208 countries contacted and researched through the literature in 2004-2006, the UDC was found to be used in 124 (60 per cent) of these. In 34 (28 per cent) of the countries researched (in Europe, Asia and Africa), UDC is the main classification system used across national information networks. In 45 (36 per cent) of the countries it is used in certain kinds of libraries. In the remaining 45 (36 per cent) of the countries it is used rarely, in only a few libraries or information centres. Research limitations/implications - It was beyond the scope of this research to provide any information regarding the actual number of institutions using UDC in a given country or to give an estimate of the size and number of document collections organised by it. Although a decline in UDC use since the 1980s was reported from a number of countries, it was not possible to measure this accurately. Practical implications - The interest shown for using UDC in the organisation of digital collections, information exchange and cross domain and cross collection resource discovery depends on accurate knowledge of its actual usage worldwide. This gives a measure of its global importance and verifies its credentials as an indexing standard. This research, which attempted wider and more systematic coverage than previous surveys, should help clarify the status of UDC and its potential use in the networked environment. Originality/value - The paper provides up-to-date information on the presence of the UDC system across countries and languages.

0.02813709 = product of:
  0.11254836 = sum of:
    0.11254836 = product of:
      0.22509672 = sum of:
        0.22509672 = weight(_text_:europe in 3131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.22509672 = score(doc=3131,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2787329 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045760795 = queryNorm
            0.8075714 = fieldWeight in 3131, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3131)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.027315779 = product of:
  0.054631557 = sum of:
    0.021824472 = weight(_text_:libraries in 1842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021824472 = score(doc=1842,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.14518027 = fieldWeight in 1842, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1842)
    0.032807086 = product of:
      0.06561417 = sum of:
        0.06561417 = weight(_text_:22 in 1842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06561417 = score(doc=1842,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045760795 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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

0.025668286 = product of:
  0.05133657 = sum of:
    0.032736704 = weight(_text_:libraries in 5779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032736704 = score(doc=5779,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.2177704 = fieldWeight in 5779, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5779)
    0.018599868 = product of:
      0.037199736 = sum of:
        0.037199736 = weight(_text_:22 in 5779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037199736 = score(doc=5779,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045760795 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5779, 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=5779)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The paper will give a short outline of the project DDC German. The project is not limited to a mere translation of DDC 22, but aims at the implementation of Dewey in the library networks of the German-language countries. Use of DDC mainly for retrieval purposes, not for shelving, leads to certain new aspects in classifying with Dewey which are described in detail and presented together with the German web service Melvil. Based an the German experience of cooperation and data exchange in the field of verbal indexing the paper develops some ideas an future Dewey cooperation between European and American libraries.

0.025668286 = product of:
  0.05133657 = sum of:
    0.032736704 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032736704 = score(doc=2151,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.2177704 = fieldWeight in 2151, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2151)
    0.018599868 = product of:
      0.037199736 = sum of:
        0.037199736 = weight(_text_:22 in 2151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037199736 = score(doc=2151,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045760795 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2151, 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=2151)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Most Swedish libraries use a Swedish classification scheme called SAB, but a switch to Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) is under consideration. The question of a Swedish switch to DDC was treated as part of a Catalogue Survey, conducted during 2006. Summarising the study, there is a lot to be said for a Swedish switch to DDC. If a switch became reality, mappings between SAB and DDC would play a crucial role as an aid both for librarians and library users. The article describes a project where a DDC arrangement of the Swedish National Bibliography should be achieved through mapping of the captions in the SAB arrangement. The methodology used is described, and problems are discussed. The article includes a comparison of DDC numbers achieved through mapping and manually added DDC numbers in a sample of bibliographic records. Future plans for DDC in Sweden are also discussed.

Date

14. 8.2008 11:22:44

0.025668286 = product of:
  0.05133657 = sum of:
    0.032736704 = weight(_text_:libraries in 3842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032736704 = score(doc=3842,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.2177704 = fieldWeight in 3842, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3842)
    0.018599868 = product of:
      0.037199736 = sum of:
        0.037199736 = weight(_text_:22 in 3842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037199736 = score(doc=3842,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045760795 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3842, 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=3842)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The Library of Congress Classification (LCC), originally designed for classifying the Library's own collection, is now used in a wide range of libraries, both in the United States and abroad. This entry recounts its history and development from its genesis to the present time, leading up to an explanation of LCC structure, tables, and notation. It then considers the system's potential for wider application in the online age, through speculation on using LCC as a tool for (a) partitioning large files; (b) generating domain-specific taxonomies; and (c) integrating classification and controlled subject terms for improved retrieval in the online public access catalog (OPAC) and the Internet. Finally, analyzing both its strong and relatively weak features, it addresses the question of whether in its current state LCC is in all respects ready for playing such roles

Date

27. 8.2011 14:22:42

0.024400499 = product of:
  0.097601995 = sum of:
    0.097601995 = weight(_text_:libraries in 1152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.097601995 = score(doc=1152,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.6492659 = fieldWeight in 1152, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1152)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Seeking to document the extent to which libraries of four-year colleges and universities have adopted the LCC system, this study surveys the classification systems used by the libraries of 1.160 accredited four-year-colleges and universities. The LC system is presently being used by more than half of these libraries; however, throughout 1968-71 the "trend to LC" clearly lost momentum. Data are provided on the extent to which the Library of Congress and The DDC systems were used in 1967 and 1971 by libraries of various sizes and categories

0.023447573 = product of:
  0.09379029 = sum of:
    0.09379029 = product of:
      0.18758059 = sum of:
        0.18758059 = weight(_text_:europe in 112) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18758059 = score(doc=112,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2787329 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045760795 = queryNorm
            0.67297614 = fieldWeight in 112, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=112)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.02139024 = product of:
  0.04278048 = sum of:
    0.02728059 = weight(_text_:libraries in 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02728059 = score(doc=116,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.18147534 = fieldWeight in 116, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=116)
    0.01549989 = product of:
      0.03099978 = sum of:
        0.03099978 = weight(_text_:22 in 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03099978 = score(doc=116,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045760795 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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

0.02139024 = product of:
  0.04278048 = sum of:
    0.02728059 = weight(_text_:libraries in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02728059 = score(doc=5797,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.18147534 = fieldWeight in 5797, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5797)
    0.01549989 = product of:
      0.03099978 = sum of:
        0.03099978 = weight(_text_:22 in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03099978 = score(doc=5797,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045760795 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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

0.020644592 = product of:
  0.08257837 = sum of:
    0.08257837 = sum of:
      0.05627418 = weight(_text_:europe in 1286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05627418 = score(doc=1286,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2787329 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045760795 = queryNorm
          0.20189285 = fieldWeight in 1286, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1286)
      0.026304187 = weight(_text_:22 in 1286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.026304187 = score(doc=1286,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045760795 = queryNorm
          0.16414827 = fieldWeight in 1286, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1286)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Der dann folgende Vortrag von Joan Mitchell mit dem programmatischen Titel "Locality and universality in the DDC" gab zuerst einen Überblick über die laufenden Übersetzungsprojekte, bezogen auf die Ed. 22, nämlich: Französisch, Italienisch, Spanisch, Griechisch, Arabisch und Chinesisch. Bezogen auf die Abridged Ed. 14 außerdem: Hebräisch und Vietnamesisch. Sie erwähnte auch den Einsatz von Dewey bei internationalen Projekten wie der "World Digital Library". Der zentrale Punkt des Vortrags betraf dann den Spagat zwischen ,Localization and Interoperability', d.h. zwischen Anpassung an regionale Gegebenheiten (wie z.B. Unterschiede in den Bereichen des Rechts- und Erziehungssystems) auf der einen Seite und Festhalten an der Durchgängigkeit der Bedeutung über alle Sprachen und Kulturen hinweg. Wie auch Magda Heiner-Freiling in ihrem Vortrag hinwies, hat sich die amerikanisch geprägte DDC im Zuge der Übersetzungsprojekte zwar schrittweise den Bedürfnissen der Benutzer in anderen Erdteilen geöffnet, dennoch bestehen noch zahlreiche Schwierigkeiten. Das von Heiner-Freiling erwähnte Beispiel der Pädagogik zeigte aber auch, dass Vorsicht bei Alleingängen auf nationaler Ebene geboten ist, da z.B. im Zuge des Bologna-Prozesses auch in Europa amerikanische institutionelle Strukturen und Terminologie im Bildungswesen Einzug halten. Weitere Vorträge befassten sich mit der Arbeit an elektronischen Verfahren zur automatischen Analyse von DDC-Notationen (Ulrike Reiner aus Göttingen), mit der DDC-Übersetzungs-Software, die für die Übersetzung ins Deutsche entwickelt wurde und nun auch in allen anderen Sprachen im Einsatz ist (Peter Werling, Fa. Pansoft) bzw. mit der DDC-Suche in verschiedenen Webportalen (Lars G. Svensson, DNB). Der abschließende Vortrag von Magda Heiner-Freiling (DNB) ging dann wieder ins Programmatische mit dem Vorschlag, eine gemeinsame European DDC Users Group (EDUG) zu gründen, um gemeinsame Anliegen der europäischen Dewey-User, was z.B. die anfangs erwähnten Probleme in einzelnen Bereichen betrifft, gemeinsam gegenüber den amerikanischen Herausgebern zu vertreten, um so mehr Einfluss auf die künftige Entwicklung der DDC zu haben.
Wer sich näher für einzelne Themen interessiert, hat die Möglichkeit, auf der Homepage der Schweizer Nationalbibliothek die Präsentationsunterlagen der einzelnen Vorträge einzusehen (http://www.nb.admin.ch/slb/slb_professionnel/projektarbeit/00729/01615/01675/index.html?lang=de). Ziel des zweiten Tages war die Gründung einer europäischen DDC-Anwendergruppe zum Zweck der Vernetzung und Planung für die gemeinsame Entwicklungsarbeit. Anwesend waren Vertreterinnen der Nationalbibliotheken von Großbritannien, Deutschland, Frankreich, Schweden, Norwegen, Italien, Schweiz und Österreich sowie eine Vertreterin von OCLC. Eingeladen hatten die Nationalbibliotheken von Deutschland und der Schweiz. Vormittags wurde eine allgemeine Diskussion über die Ziele und Möglichkeiten einer solchen Anwendergruppe sowie allgemein über die Vorteile einer DDC-Anwendung in Europa diskutiert. Ziele von EDUG könnten sein: - Monitoring der europäischen DDC-Anwendungen - Kenntnis der unterschiedlichen Anwendungsregeln in den verschiedenen Ländern - Zugang auch zu den DDC-Übersetzungen in anderen Sprachen samt Expansionen - Zusammenarbeit beim Angebot von "built numbers" Zusammenarbeit mit OCLC als Vertreterin von europäischen Anliegen (die am Vortag ausführlich angesprochen worden waren) - Harmonisierung der Änderungen in den verschiedensprachigen Ausgaben (21./22. Ed., unterschiedliche Erweiterungen, anderer Sprachgebrauch) - Kooperation bei der Realisierung von technischen Plänen wie z.B. die automatische Klassifikation von Online-Dokumenten oder dem Mapping zu anderen Klassifikationssystemen - Weitergabe von Know-how und Erfahrungen an andere Interessierte Spontan wurden drei Arbeitsgruppen ins Leben gerufen, und zwar eine für technische Angelegenheiten und zwei inhaltliche für die kritischen Bereiche Recht und Erziehung. Nachmittags wurden die Satzungen von EDUG diskutiert und überarbeitet. Bei vielen Punkten wurde Übereinkunft erzielt. Einzelne Fragen blieben noch offen und sollen beim nächsten Treffen - wahrscheinlich im April 2008 in Frankfurt - endgültig fixiert werden."

0.019096414 = product of:
  0.076385655 = sum of:
    0.076385655 = weight(_text_:libraries in 4307) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.076385655 = score(doc=4307,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.50813097 = fieldWeight in 4307, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4307)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Imprint

Littleton, Colo. : Libraries Unlimited

0.01852449 = product of:
  0.03704898 = sum of:
    0.023625683 = weight(_text_:libraries in 129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023625683 = score(doc=129,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.15716225 = fieldWeight in 129, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=129)
    0.013423299 = product of:
      0.026846599 = sum of:
        0.026846599 = weight(_text_:22 in 129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026846599 = score(doc=129,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045760795 = queryNorm
            0.16753313 = fieldWeight in 129, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=129)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 31(2004) no.2, S.112-114 (M.P. Satija) : "With nearly 130 years of eventful and checkered history, the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) is the oldest living yet thriving modern library classification. Having undergone 21 revisions, it is the most applied library classification structure all over the world. Apart from its use in libraries in more than 135 countries across six continents, many national and trade bibliographies use it for content organization. Furthermore, it is now making successful forays into the world of electronic documents and networked information. The print version of the 22nd edition was released in September 2003, two months later than the scheduled time of July 2003, and two months after the release of the electronic version, WebDewey. The period between print editions now seems settled to seven years as a matter of policy. As WebDewey, an the other hand, is updated an a quarterly basis, what really constitutes a new edition is problematic; edition is rolling, always in a flux without much fixity. The last half century, and more specifically the tenure of Benjamin A. Custer as editor (1956-1980; Editions 16-19), has been an era of structural changes in the DDC, backed by professional management and organizational planning. Custer was instrumental in not only resuscitating the system, but also in putting DDC back an the path of progress. His able successor, Dr. John P. Comaromi, edited the 20`h edition (1989) and ushered in a period of simplification and consolidation. Following the acquisition of Forest Press by OCLC in 1988, much more research has gone into making new editions of the DDC. The OCLC Office of Research has involved itself in classification research, especially in the harmonization of various knowledge classification systems and mapping of DDC numbers to subject headings, above all to make DDC capable of organizing electronic information of every sort. The acquisition of DDC by OCLC has also inaugurated an era of new products and services, along with organized marketing. DDC21 (1996) was a product of high IT, and the 22nd edition can safely be termed a child of network technology. It is indeed the first edition produced in the web environment. To stay abreast of current developments an knowledge practices, the editors relied an the Internet and electronic databases for new topics and terms. Editors and policy makes got constant feedback and suggestions via the Internet to add new features and to achieve accuracy and efficiency. In addition to the feedback and expert advice, this edition, as usual, is based an actual classification of three quarters of a million current books in the Decimal Classification Division of the Library of Congress since 1996.
WebDewey (2003) and Abridged WebDewey (2004) are now only available an the Internet to licensed users. WebDewey is an enhanced version of the Dewey database of terms and numbers available in the print edition. Updated quarterly, it is only accessible via the Internet an an annual subscription basis. It provides much more facilities including key words navigation. Annotation feature allows cIassifiers to add and share notes about local classification changes. WebDewey is available within the full OCLC cataloguing services environment. It provides many access points with many search and browse Indexes. It makes the location of Dewey numbers an "easy" game. The annually updated Dewey for Windows an CD ceased publication in 2001; this decision may hurt the libraries in developing countries where the Internet, due to poor telecommunication infrastructure and unreliable services, is not easily accessible.
Changes DDC22 is the second edition prepared by Joan S. Mitchell who took over as editor in 1993. It carries forward the policies and improvements started in DDC21, especially the onslaught an the Christian and western cultural blas in the schedules and tables. The plan for reducing Christian blas in 200 Religion, initiated in DDC21, has now been completed, with some additional provisions in 296 and 297. An outstanding change has been the abrogation of Table 7 Persons. The functions of Table 7 are now filled by using T1-08 and whatever notation is appropriate from 011-999. There are at least six places in the tables and 12 places in the schedules where the use of T7 was prescribed; what good the abolition of T7 has produced is not clear. In fact, it does make number building in some cases a bit circuitous, especially while using Table 3C. It has also resulted in the reuse of many DDC 21 numbers with new meanings. However, some numbers remain the same e.g., Social customs of artists 390.47 (both in DDC21 and DDC22). A few numbers have also become shorter in length. In compliance with the recommendations of D'Elia's survey, all works relating to directories of travel facilities such as hotels, lodges, Motels, inns, have been shifted to 910.46 and to 913/919 whereas 647.94 continues to be in place for general information about hotels. A common practice in previous editions, that is full class or extensive revisions (phoenix schedules), appear to have been discontinued in the preparation of DDC22. But minor changes are numerous. There are more than one thousand relocations and discontiuations of class numbers. Some 40 numbers have been reused. ... However, all these changes are not those projected as slated changes for DDC22 in the DDC21 (1996), namely in 520 Astronomy, 355-359 Military science, 636-639 Animal husbandry and 690 Buildings. Obviously the switch over to the DDC 22 will put less strain an libraries. There has been considerable improvement in the manual, now shifted to volume 1 of the print edition (pp. 1-182). Notes in the manual have been shortened by removing redundant information and by dividing them into smaller sections. Some information from the manual has been transferred to the schedules and tables, in the form of notes. The manual is now clearer and easier to read. Flow Charts, built-in numbers, and see also references should help classifiers achieve greater consistency. The relative index has been beefed up. With its 928 pages, it is 333 pages longer than the previous one, including new built-in numbers and many additional terms. The entry vocabulary is wide-based and current. DDC 22, the first edition of this millennium, has kept pace with the fast changing information environment to map and organize it squarely. To quote our friends at OCLC: knowledge is a big world, and they have organized it."

Object

DDC-22

0.016537977 = product of:
  0.06615191 = sum of:
    0.06615191 = weight(_text_:libraries in 5181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06615191 = score(doc=5181,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.4400543 = fieldWeight in 5181, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5181)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Nearly 25 years have elapsed since the last comprehensive measure of the percentage of academic libraries that employ the Dewey and Library of Congress systems of classification. To provide updated statistics, the researchers surveyed all 3793 academic libraries via their online catalogs. The findings indicate that the use of Dewey has declined over the past four decades. Teachers' Colleges and Community Colleges in particular have higher rates of Dewey use than large research or professional universities. This information may help support academic library reclassification decisions.

0.016368352 = product of:
  0.06547341 = sum of:
    0.06547341 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06547341 = score(doc=2118,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.4355408 = fieldWeight in 2118, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2118)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Imprint

Littleton, Colo. : Libraries Unlimited

0.016368352 = product of:
  0.06547341 = sum of:
    0.06547341 = weight(_text_:libraries in 46) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06547341 = score(doc=46,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.4355408 = fieldWeight in 46, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=46)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.016368352 = product of:
  0.06547341 = sum of:
    0.06547341 = weight(_text_:libraries in 6967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06547341 = score(doc=6967,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045760795 = queryNorm
        0.4355408 = fieldWeight in 6967, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6967)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)