Search (14 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Aufstellungssysteme Wissenschaftl. Bibliotheken"
  1. Lorenz, B.: ¬The Regensburg Classification Scheme : users and partners (1995) 0.03 
    0.028895756 = product of:
  0.057791512 = sum of:
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 2886) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=2886,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 2886, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2886)
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 2886) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=2886,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    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
  2. Hyman, R.J.: Access to library collections : summary of a documentary and opinion survey on the direct shelf approach and browsing (1971) 0.02 
    0.016243188 = product of:
  0.06497275 = sum of:
    0.06497275 = weight(_text_:library in 2428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06497275 = score(doc=2428,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.4930085 = fieldWeight in 2428, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2428)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 15(1971), S.479-491
  3. Hyman, R.J.: Access to library collections : an inquiry into the validity of the direct shelf approach, with special reference to browsing (1972) 0.01 
    0.013399946 = product of:
  0.053599782 = sum of:
    0.053599782 = weight(_text_:library in 7344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053599782 = score(doc=7344,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 7344, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7344)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
  4. Höckmair, B.: ¬Eine One-Person Library stellt sich vor : die Bibliothek des Deutschen Notarinstituts (1996) 0.01 
    0.011485667 = product of:
  0.045942668 = sum of:
    0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 5444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045942668 = score(doc=5444,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 5444, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5444)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
  5. Jager, K. de: Obsolescence and stress : a study of the use of books on open shelves at a university library (1994) 0.01 
    0.00957139 = product of:
  0.03828556 = sum of:
    0.03828556 = weight(_text_:library in 7655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03828556 = score(doc=7655,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.29050803 = fieldWeight in 7655, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7655)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Reports the results of a study at the main library of Cape Town University, to investigate complaints about ageing book stock and declining resources and observations that many books were hardly circulating. The study aimed to establish the proportion of the books in the library which were actively circulating and whether the accepted phenomenon of decline in use with age, or obsolescence, would be supported in an environment where a reduction in the purchase of new books was evident. Two separate investigations were conducted: a diachronous study of accession dates, classification numbers and date labels of the open shelf collection; and a synchronous study of books on loan during the period of investigation. The resulting database consisted of 2654 and 1023 records respectively. Evidence suggests that older books, do not exhibit the expected characteristics of obsolescence and, while a certain measure of decline of use with age was demonstrated, such decline may be reversed in times of decreasing resources or increasing demands from existing resources. Suggests that the library could develop an informed weeding policy that will enable it to remove from the shelves those materials that have remained unused or little used for 25 years or more
  6. Holley, R.P.: Classification in the USA (1986) 0.01 
    0.009475192 = product of:
  0.03790077 = sum of:
    0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 1524) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03790077 = score(doc=1524,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 1524, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1524)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    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
  7. Clarke, R.I.: Library classification systems in the U.S. : basic ideas and examples (2021) 0.01 
    0.009475192 = product of:
  0.03790077 = sum of:
    0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03790077 = score(doc=705,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 705, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=705)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    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."
  8. Klassifikationen in Bibliotheken : Theorie - Anwendung - Nutzen (2018) 0.01 
    0.0066312538 = product of:
  0.026525015 = sum of:
    0.026525015 = weight(_text_:library in 5682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026525015 = score(doc=5682,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20126988 = fieldWeight in 5682, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5682)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Footnote
    Vgl.: https://www.degruyter.com/viewbooktoc/product/185786. Rez. in: o-bib 6(2019) H.1, S.93-97 (H. Wiesenmüller) [https://www.o-bib.de/issue/view/313]; iwp 70(2019) H.5/6, S.315-317 (Barbara Müller Heiden); Library essentials, Oktober 2019, S-36-37 (F. Förster).
    LCSH
    Library science / German speaking countries
    Subject
    Library science / German speaking countries
  9. Lorenz, B.: Systematische Aufstellung in deutschen wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken (1995) 0.01 
    0.0057428335 = product of:
  0.022971334 = sum of:
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 6968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=6968,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 6968, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6968)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Content
    Inhalt: Aufstellungssystematiken: Die Klassifikation der Library of Congress (LCC) - Die Fachsystematiken der Universitätsbibliothek Bielefeld (Bi) - Die Fachsystematiken der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Bremen (Br) - Die Aufstellungssystematik der Gesamthochschulbibliotheken des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen (HBZ) - Die Aufstellungssystematiken der Universitätsbibliothek Konstanz (K) - Die Aufstellungssystematiken der Universitätsbibliothek Regensburg (R) - Die Aufstellungssystematiken der Universitätsbibliothek Trier (T) Beispiele für den Vergleich der Aufstellungssystematiken: Zahl der verwendeten Aufstellungssystematiken - Quantitativer Gesamtumfang der Aufstellungssystematiken - Quantitativer Umfang einzelner Systematiken - Quantitativ umfangreiche Systematiken innerhalb der Aufstellungssystematiken der einzelnen Bibliotheken - Beispiele für aus dem Rahmen fallende Einzelsystematiken - Beispiele für Abgrenzungen von Themenbereichen in den Systematiken - Beispiele für durch verschiedene Systematiken erfaßte Themenbereiche - Gegenüberstellung einiger Systematiken - Beispiele für Themenbereiche und ihre Einordnung in Systematiken Aufstellungssystematiken im Bibliotheksverbund: Grundüberlegungen zur Systematischen Aufstellung - Allgemeine Anforderungen an Aufstellungssystematiken - Besondere Anforderungen und Probleme bei systematischer Aufstellung - Notwendigkeit bibliothekarischer Sacherschließung neben der systematischen Aufstellung
  10. Zuckerstätter, B.: Klassifikation und Beschlagwortung : zur Verwendung von Schlagwörtern in Aufstellungsklassifikationen (2012) 0.00 
    0.004785695 = product of:
  0.01914278 = sum of:
    0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01914278 = score(doc=594,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 594, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=594)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Footnote
    Wien, Univ., Lehrgang Library and Information Studies, Master-Thesis, 2012
  11. Waldhör, A.: Erstellung einer Konkordanz zwischen Basisklassifikation (BK) und Regensburger Verbundklassifikation (RVK) für den Fachbereich Recht (2012) 0.00 
    0.004785695 = product of:
  0.01914278 = sum of:
    0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01914278 = score(doc=596,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 596, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=596)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Footnote
    Wien, Univ., Lehrgang Library and Information Studies, Master-Thesis, 2012
  12. Lorenz, B.: Systematische Aufstellung in deutschen wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken (1985) 0.00 
    0.004785695 = product of:
  0.01914278 = sum of:
    0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 2073) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01914278 = score(doc=2073,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 2073, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2073)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Es wird ein Überblick über die in deutschen wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken verwendeten Ausstellungssystematiken gegeben: Die Fachsystematiken der Universitätsbibliothek Bielefeld - Die Fachsystematiken der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Bremen - Die Aufstellungssystematik der Gesamthochschulbibliotheken des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen - Die Aufstellungssystematiken der Universitätsbibliothek Konstanz - Die Aufstellungssystematiken der Universitätsbibliothek Regensburg - Die Aufstellungssystematiken der Universitätsbibliothek Trier. Als Vorbild für die Regensburger Systematik wird zusätzlich die Klassifikation der Library of Congress berücksichtigt. Vergleichskriterien sind: Zahl der verwendeten Aufstellungssystematiken - Quantitativer Gesamtumfang der Aufstellungssystematiken - Quantitativer Umfang einzelner Systematiken - Quantitativ umfangreiche Systematiken innerhalb der Aufstellungssystematiken der einzelnen Bibliotheken - Beispiele für aus dem Rahmen fallende Einzelsystematiken - Beispiele für Abgrenzungen von Themenbereichen in den Systematiken - Beispiele für durch verschiedene Systematiken erfaßte Themenbereiche - Gegenüberstellung einiger Systematiken - Beispiele für Themenbereiche und ihre Einordnung in Systematiken.
  13. Werr, N.; Ball, R.: ¬Die "neue" Regensburger Verbundklassifikation (RVK) oder die Zukunft eines Erfolgsmodells (2009) 0.00 
    0.0029709602 = product of:
  0.011883841 = sum of:
    0.011883841 = product of:
      0.023767682 = sum of:
        0.023767682 = weight(_text_:22 in 3040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023767682 = score(doc=3040,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 8.2009 12:00:39
  14. Lorenz, B.: Systematische Aufstellung in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart (2002) 0.00 
    0.0025465374 = product of:
  0.01018615 = sum of:
    0.01018615 = product of:
      0.0203723 = sum of:
        0.0203723 = weight(_text_:22 in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0203723 = score(doc=1786,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 3.2008 17:56:19

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

Themes

Subjects

Classifications