Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"International bedeutende Universalklassifikationen"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Panzer, M.: Dewey: how to make it work for you (2013) 0.02 
    0.022024449 = product of:
  0.044048898 = sum of:
    0.027071979 = weight(_text_:library in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027071979 = score(doc=5797,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.2054202 = fieldWeight in 5797, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5797)
    0.016976917 = product of:
      0.033953834 = sum of:
        0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033953834 = score(doc=5797,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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)
    Abstract
    The article discusses various aspects of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system of classifying library books in 2013. Background is presented on some librarians' desire to stop using DDC and adopt a genre-based system of classification. It says librarians can use the DDC to deal with problems and issues related to library book classification. It highlights the benefits of using captions and relative index terms and semantic relationships in DDC.
    Source
    Knowledge quest. 42(2013) no.2, S.22-29
  2. Lund, B.D.; Agbaji, D.A.: What scheme do we prefer? : an examination of preference between Library of Congress and Dewey Decimal Classification among U.S.-based academic library employees (2018) 0.02 
    0.018950384 = product of:
  0.07580154 = sum of:
    0.07580154 = weight(_text_:library in 4301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07580154 = score(doc=4301,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.57517654 = fieldWeight in 4301, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4301)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Though several studies have been published on the topic of reclassification of academic library collections over the past eight decades since it first gained popularity, none have explored the preferences of academic library employees toward classification schemes beyond a merely superficial level. The preferences of library employees must serve some role in organizational decision-making. By distributing a mixed-methods survey to academic library employees across the United States, the researchers in the present study provide insight into employee preferences. The findings of the study may provide insight into library trends and the future of library classification schemes.
  3. Zins, C.; Santos, P.L.V.A.C.: Mapping the knowledge covered by library classification systems (2011) 0.01 
    0.011485667 = product of:
  0.045942668 = sum of:
    0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 4449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045942668 = score(doc=4449,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 4449, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4449)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    This study explores, in 3 steps, how the 3 main library classification systems, the Library of Congress Classification, the Dewey Decimal Classification, and the Universal Decimal Classification, cover human knowledge. First, we mapped the knowledge covered by the 3 systems. We used the "10 Pillars of Knowledge: Map of Human Knowledge," which comprises 10 pillars, as an evaluative model. We mapped all the subject-based classes and subclasses that are part of the first 2 levels of the 3 hierarchical structures. Then, we zoomed into each of the 10 pillars and analyzed how the three systems cover the 10 knowledge domains. Finally, we focused on the 3 library systems. Based on the way each one of them covers the 10 knowledge domains, it is evident that they failed to adequately and systematically present contemporary human knowledge. They are unsystematic and biased, and, at the top 2 levels of the hierarchical structures, they are incomplete.
  4. Higgins, C.: Library of Congress Classification : Teddy Roosevelt's world in numbers? (2012) 0.01 
    0.010828791 = product of:
  0.043315165 = sum of:
    0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 1905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043315165 = score(doc=1905,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 1905, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1905)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    This article identifies late nineteenth-century American preoccupations and prejudices within the Library of Congress classification scheme, suggesting that these ought to be of concern to the worldwide community of classifiers who now apply the scheme beyond its original context. The approach of the article is both historical and critical. It uses a number of examples to demonstrate how the ideological content of the classification scheme fails to adequately represent contemporary global realities, while recognizing, and applauding, its essential pragmatism.
  5. Lund, B.; Agbaji, D.: Use of Dewey Decimal Classification by academic libraries in the United States (2018) 0.01 
    0.009475192 = product of:
  0.03790077 = sum of:
    0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 5181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03790077 = score(doc=5181,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 5181, 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=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.
  6. Chatterjee, A.: Universal Decimal Classification and Colon Classification : their mutual impact (2015) 0.01 
    0.0076571116 = product of:
  0.030628446 = sum of:
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 1650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=1650,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 1650, 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=1650)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Annals of library and information studies. 62(2015) no.4, S. 226-230
  7. Panigrahi, P.: Ranganathan and Dewey in hierarchical subject classification : some similarities (2015) 0.01 
    0.0076571116 = product of:
  0.030628446 = sum of:
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 2789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=2789,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 2789, 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=2789)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Annals of library and information studies. 62(2015) no.4, S.265-267
  8. Junger, U.: Basisinformationen zur Universellen Dezimalklassifikation (UDK) (2018) 0.01 
    0.0067907665 = product of:
  0.027163066 = sum of:
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 4337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=4337,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4337, 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=4337)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    7. 7.2018 17:22:00
  9. Satija, M.P.: Abridged Dewey-15 (2012) in historical perspectives (2012) 0.00 
    0.0042442293 = product of:
  0.016976917 = sum of:
    0.016976917 = product of:
      0.033953834 = sum of:
        0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033953834 = score(doc=116,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    3. 3.2016 18:59:22

Authors

Languages

Types

Themes