Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0785248 = product of:
  0.27483678 = sum of:
    0.13997799 = weight(_text_:united in 1524) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13997799 = score(doc=1524,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22812355 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04066292 = queryNorm
        0.6136061 = fieldWeight in 1524, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1524)
    0.13485877 = weight(_text_:states in 1524) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13485877 = score(doc=1524,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22391328 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04066292 = queryNorm
        0.6022813 = fieldWeight in 1524, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1524)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

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

0.055525415 = product of:
  0.19433895 = sum of:
    0.09897938 = weight(_text_:united in 705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09897938 = score(doc=705,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22812355 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04066292 = queryNorm
        0.433885 = fieldWeight in 705, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=705)
    0.09535956 = weight(_text_:states in 705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09535956 = score(doc=705,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22391328 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04066292 = queryNorm
        0.42587718 = fieldWeight in 705, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=705)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

This article offers a basic introduction to classification in the context of librarianship in the United States with an aim toward filling gaps in formal education and practical experience. The article defines the concept of classification and discusses the goals and purposes of classification, both functional and intellectual. Overviews of two common classification systems frequently used in U.S. libraries are presented: Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Library of Congress Classification (LCC), as well as an introduction to a group of classifications known as "reader-interest classifications."

0.03743412 = product of:
  0.13101941 = sum of:
    0.108982354 = weight(_text_:states in 2886) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.108982354 = score(doc=2886,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22391328 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04066292 = queryNorm
        0.48671678 = fieldWeight in 2886, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2886)
    0.022037057 = product of:
      0.044074114 = sum of:
        0.044074114 = weight(_text_:22 in 2886) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044074114 = score(doc=2886,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14239462 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04066292 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2886, 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=2886)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Description of the history and development of the home-made Regensburg Classification Scheme since 1964 and its notation which has been built according to the one of the Library of Congress. Although not intended in the beginning, the scheme has become the common tool for a number of Bavarian libraries since 1970 and also of libraries in Switzerland (since 1986) and the socalled new German states (after 1990). The individual schedules are listed and also the classification aids published with the scheme's progressing. Concludingly future plans are outlined

Source

Knowledge organization. 22(1995) nos.3/4, S.158-161

0.0013773161 = product of:
  0.009641212 = sum of:
    0.009641212 = product of:
      0.019282425 = sum of:
        0.019282425 = weight(_text_:22 in 3040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019282425 = score(doc=3040,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14239462 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04066292 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3040, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3040)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

22. 8.2009 12:00:39

0.0011805566 = product of:
  0.008263896 = sum of:
    0.008263896 = product of:
      0.016527792 = sum of:
        0.016527792 = weight(_text_:22 in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016527792 = score(doc=1786,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14239462 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04066292 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 1786, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1786)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

22. 3.2008 17:56:19