Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.046775818 = product of:
  0.093551636 = sum of:
    0.093551636 = sum of:
      0.048973244 = weight(_text_:work in 6521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048973244 = score(doc=6521,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20127523 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
            0.054837555 = queryNorm
          0.2433148 = fieldWeight in 6521, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6521)
      0.04457839 = weight(_text_:22 in 6521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04457839 = score(doc=6521,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19203177 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.054837555 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6521, 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=6521)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Examines changes in the rules for cataloguing certein categories of printed material, anonymous works, including: those described as being 'by the author of' another named work; pseudonymous works; edited works (collections of writings of several authors); and conference proceedings. Discusses the relevant rules from the British Museum, the 1908 joint code, the Bodleian, Cambridge University Library and AACR2, Samples of London publications taken in specimen years between 1841 and 1991 show that there has been a decrease in anonymous works and in works with personal authors, offset by a sharp increase in multiple authorship, edited works and conference proceedings. Concludes that these changes have taken place in response to external forces. Some changes have been because the rules have been found to be unworkable or based on unnecessary or false distinctions which were impossible for the cataloguer to interpret

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.2, S.29-50

0.02302167 = product of:
  0.04604334 = sum of:
    0.04604334 = sum of:
      0.016324414 = weight(_text_:work in 359) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.016324414 = score(doc=359,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20127523 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
            0.054837555 = queryNorm
          0.081104934 = fieldWeight in 359, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=359)
      0.029718926 = weight(_text_:22 in 359) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.029718926 = score(doc=359,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.19203177 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.054837555 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 359, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=359)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

"The contents of the book cover: This book is intended as an introduction to the Dewey Decimal Classification, edition 22. It is not a substitute for it, and I assume that you have it, all four volumes of it, by you while reading the book. I have deliberately included only a short section an WebDewey. This is partly because WebDewey is likely to change more frequently than the printed version, but also because this book is intended to help you use the scheme regardless of the manifestation in which it appears. If you have a subscription to WebDewey and not the printed volumes you may be able to manage with that, but you may then find my references to volumes and page numbers baffling. All the examples and exercises are real; what is not real is the idea that you can classify something without seeing more than the title. However, there is nothing that I can do about this, and I have therefore tried to choose examples whose titles adequately express their subject-matter. Sometimes when you look at the 'answers' you may feel that you have been cheated, but I hope that this will be seldom. Two people deserve special thanks. My colleague Vanda Broughton has read drafts of the book and made many suggestions. Ross Trotter, chair of the CILIP Dewey Decimal Classification Committee, who knows more about Dewey than anyone in Britain today, has commented extensively an it and as far as possible has saved me from error, as well as suggesting many improvements. What errors remain are due to me alone. Thanks are also owed to OCLC Online Computer Library Center, for permission to reproduce some specimen pages of DDC 22. Excerpts from the Dewey Decimal Classification are taken from the Dewey Decimal Classification and Relative Index, Edition 22 which is Copyright 2003 OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc. DDC, Dewey, Dewey Decimal Classification and WebDewey are registered trademarks of OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc."

Footnote

"The title says it all. The book contains the essentials for a fundamental understanding of the complex world of the Dewey Decimal Classification. It is clearly written and captures the essence in a concise and readable style. Is it a coincidence that the mysteries of the Dewey Decimal System are revealed in ten easy chapters? The typography and layout are clear and easy to read and the perfect binding withstood heavy use. The exercises and answers are invaluable in illustrating the points of the several chapters. The book is well structured. Chapter 1 provides an "Introduction and background" to classification in general and Dewey in particular. Chapter 2 describes the "Outline of the scheme" and the conventions in the schedules and tables. Chapter 3 covers "Simple subjects" and introduces the first of the exercises. Chapters 4 and 5 describe "Number-building" with "standard subdivisions" in the former and "other methods" in the latter. Chapter 6 provides an excellent description of "Preference order" and Chapter 7 deals with "Exceptions and options." Chapter 8 "Special subjects," while no means exhaustive, gives a thorough analysis of problems with particular parts of the schedules from "100 Philosophy" to "910 Geography" with a particular discussion of "'Persons treatment"' and "Optional treatment of biography." Chapter 9 treats "Compound subjects." Chapter 10 briefly introduces WebDewey and provides the URL for the Web Dewey User Guide http://www.oclc.org/support/documentation/dewey/ webdewey_userguide/; the section for exercises says: "You are welcome to try using WebDewey an the exercises in any of the preceding chapters." Chapters 6 and 7 are invaluable at clarifying the options and bases for choice when a work is multifaceted or is susceptible of classification under different Dewey Codes. The recommendation "... not to adopt options, but use the scheme as instructed" (p. 71) is clearly sound. As is, "What is vital, of course, is that you keep a record of the decisions you make and to stick to them. Any option Chosen must be used consistently, and not the whim of the individual classifier" (p. 71). The book was first published in the UK and the British overtones, which may seem quite charming to a Canadian, may be more difficult for readers from the United States. The correction of Dewey's spelling of Labor to Labo [u] r (p. 54) elicited a smile for the championing of lost causes and some relief that we do not have to cope with 'simplified speling.' The down-to-earth opinions of the author, which usually agree with those of the reviewer, add savour to the text and enliven what might otherwise have been a tedious text indeed. However, in the case of (p. 82):

Object

DDC-22

0.014283863 = product of:
  0.028567726 = sum of:
    0.028567726 = product of:
      0.05713545 = sum of:
        0.05713545 = weight(_text_:work in 5753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05713545 = score(doc=5753,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20127523 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.054837555 = queryNorm
            0.28386727 = fieldWeight in 5753, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5753)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

A survey of postgraduate education and training for cataloguing and classification in the British Isles in late 2003 was carried out by consulting websites and sending an email request. Cataloguing and classification have become largely invisible in professional education, but it appears that most courses still include something about them, though not always as a compulsory module and usually without much practical work. The course at University College London is described. Views of recent graduates, and of chief cataloguers and other trainers, are included, and show that the general opinion is that not enough is being taught about cataloguing and classification. Finally the article looks at training given by commercial providers.

0.01300203 = product of:
  0.02600406 = sum of:
    0.02600406 = product of:
      0.05200812 = sum of:
        0.05200812 = weight(_text_:22 in 5365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05200812 = score(doc=5365,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19203177 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.054837555 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5365, 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=5365)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

An Internet survey of 38 different OPAC systems, at eighty different libraries, was undertaken to investigate the effect on retrieval of the presence of the hyphen or the ampersand in titles. Title and Keyword searches were performed. In Title search, 22 of the systems treat the hyphen as equivalent to a space, while in Keyword the number is 16. The other systems treat it in various different ways (even including the equivalent of NOT), which means that results of searching multiple catalogs are very inconsistent. The ampersand may be ignored, treated as a special character, or treated as "and," again with very inconsistent results. Various recommendations are made with a view to improving consistency of performance.