Search (72 results, page 1 of 4)

0.029941088 = product of:
  0.04491163 = sum of:
    0.026401049 = weight(_text_:to in 538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026401049 = score(doc=538,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.3188683 = fieldWeight in 538, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=538)
    0.018510582 = product of:
      0.037021164 = sum of:
        0.037021164 = weight(_text_:22 in 538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037021164 = score(doc=538,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 538, 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=538)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The elements that comprise 'style' in creative writing are directly applicable to librarians, in the choice of books and periodicals, and in the process of cataloguing and classification to make them accessible to users. By the selection and arrangement of their stock librarians reveal professional accounts of the culture they have inherited and are endeavouring to pass on to future generations. Illustrates the discussion with particular reference to the life and career of Dr. John Henry Pyle Pafford, Librarian at London University, and in particular to his views on the development of general classification schemes, such as the DDC and BC, and the work of the CRG. Concludes by noting his work in the fields of education, national and international library cooperation, and as Library-Keeper of the University

Date

9. 2.1997 18:44:22

0.027839875 = product of:
  0.04175981 = sum of:
    0.020164136 = weight(_text_:to in 2550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020164136 = score(doc=2550,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.24353972 = fieldWeight in 2550, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2550)
    0.021595677 = product of:
      0.043191355 = sum of:
        0.043191355 = weight(_text_:22 in 2550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043191355 = score(doc=2550,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2550, 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=2550)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The paper takes a retrospective look at the work of Henry Evelyn Bliss, classificationist theorist and author of the Bibliographic Classification. Major features of his writings and philosophy are examined and evaluated for the originality of their contribution to the corpus of knowledge in the discipline. Reactions to Bliss's work are analysed, as is his influence on classification theory of the 20th century. Contemporary work on knowledge organization is seen to continue a number of strands from Bliss's original writings. His standing as a classificationist is compared with that of Ranganathan, with the conclusion that he is not given the credit he deserves.

Date

9. 2.1997 18:44:22

0.024950907 = product of:
  0.03742636 = sum of:
    0.022000873 = weight(_text_:to in 3509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022000873 = score(doc=3509,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.2657236 = fieldWeight in 3509, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3509)
    0.015425485 = product of:
      0.03085097 = sum of:
        0.03085097 = weight(_text_:22 in 3509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03085097 = score(doc=3509,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3509, 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=3509)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In light of ongoing debates about ontological vs. epistemological approaches to knowledge organization (KO), this paper examines E. C. Richardson's treatment of ontology and epistemology in his theory of classification. According to Richardson, there is a natural order of things in the world accessible to human cognition, which may be expressed in two classificatory orders: evolutionary classification, which ranges classes of things from the most simple to the most complex, and logical classification, which ranges classes of things in the inverse order, from the most complex to the most simple. Evolutionary classification reflects ontological order and logical classification reflects epistemological order: both are faces of a single natural order. Such a view requires adherence to a representationalist, or, in Hjorland's (2008) terms, positivist understanding of epistemology, wherein human knowledge faithfully mirrors the structure of the external world. Richardson's harmonization of ontology and epistemology will find little favor among proponents of the currently fashionable pragmatist approach to KO. Nevertheless, it constitutes an early version of what Gnoli (2004) terms a naturalistic epistemology, which, once deepened and clarified, offers the best prospects for an explicit expression of both the ontological and epistemological dimensions of knowledge within a single classification of general scope.

Pages

S.15-22

0.022679746 = product of:
  0.03401962 = sum of:
    0.018594133 = weight(_text_:to in 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018594133 = score(doc=116,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.22457743 = fieldWeight in 116, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=116)
    0.015425485 = product of:
      0.03085097 = sum of:
        0.03085097 = weight(_text_:22 in 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03085097 = score(doc=116,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = 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)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

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

0.016453851 = product of:
  0.04936155 = sum of:
    0.04936155 = product of:
      0.0987231 = sum of:
        0.0987231 = weight(_text_:22 in 1168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0987231 = score(doc=1168,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 1168, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1168)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Nachrichten für Dokumentation. 22(1971), S.55-63

0.012340388 = product of:
  0.037021164 = sum of:
    0.037021164 = product of:
      0.07404233 = sum of:
        0.07404233 = weight(_text_:22 in 3554) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07404233 = score(doc=3554,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3554, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3554)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

25.12.1995 22:28:43

0.00940797 = product of:
  0.02822391 = sum of:
    0.02822391 = weight(_text_:to in 312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02822391 = score(doc=312,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.34088457 = fieldWeight in 312, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=312)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The article identifies 2 distinct sections, one within the public library sphere and one in academic libraries, relevant for the development of a unique Swedish classification system (the SAB-system) to be used in public libraries. These are used to analyse the social and discursive influences that led to a rejection of the DDC as the common classification system for the public libraries in Sweden. The author analyses the debate that took place in the 1910s in various publications and idetifies theoretical as well as some practical reasons for rejecting the DDC. Reference is also made to the situation in Norway and Denmark at this time and their attempts to influence Sweden to accept the DDC as had been done in these countries. Conclusions are drawn that the reasons for rejection of the DDC not only is to be sought in theoretical or even practical problems regarding the system itself but in the academic library sector which, through the SAB-system, could create a lasting influence on the knowledge organisation in public libraries in order to uphold the national identity of thre Swedish library system

0.008869919 = product of:
  0.026609756 = sum of:
    0.026609756 = weight(_text_:to in 1244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026609756 = score(doc=1244,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.32138905 = fieldWeight in 1244, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1244)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.008869919 = product of:
  0.026609756 = sum of:
    0.026609756 = weight(_text_:to in 3677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026609756 = score(doc=3677,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.32138905 = fieldWeight in 3677, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3677)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Attempts to present a logical analysis of the concept of classification with special reference to library science. examines the view that the objective of classification adopted in the library is not to categorise books but knowledge and focuses on the concept of knowledge. With regard to classification of knowledge, it has been pointed out that there are no natural classes and all classifications are artificial. Classification of knowledge can never be absolute and final as knowledge is neither static not circumscribed

0.008869919 = product of:
  0.026609756 = sum of:
    0.026609756 = weight(_text_:to in 833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026609756 = score(doc=833,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.32138905 = fieldWeight in 833, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=833)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article explores the connections between Melvil Dewey and Hegelianism and Charles Cutter and the Scottish Common Sense philosophers. It traces the practice of hierarchy from these philosophical influences to Dewey and Cutter and their legacy to today's Dewey Decimal Classification and Library of Congress Subject Headings. The ubiquity of hierarchy is linked to Dewey's and Cutter's metaphor of organizing the mob of information into an orderly army using the tool of logic.

0.008677262 = product of:
  0.026031785 = sum of:
    0.026031785 = weight(_text_:to in 4466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026031785 = score(doc=4466,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.3144084 = fieldWeight in 4466, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4466)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper examines Parmenides's 'Fragments', Plato's 'The sophist', and Aristotle's 'Prior analytics, parts of animals', and 'Generation of animals' to identify 3 underlying presumptions of classical logic using the method of Foucauldian discourse analysis. These 3 presumptions are the notion of mutually exclusive categories, teleology in the sense of linear progression toward a goal, and hierarchy both through logical division and through the dominance of some classes over others. These 3 presumptions are linked to classificatory thought in the western tradition. The purpose of making the connections is to investigate the cultural specifity to western culture of widespread classificatory practice. It is a step in a larger study to examine classification as a cultural construction that may be systematically incompatible with other cultures and with marginalized elements of western culture

0.008677262 = product of:
  0.026031785 = sum of:
    0.026031785 = weight(_text_:to in 1594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026031785 = score(doc=1594,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.3144084 = fieldWeight in 1594, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1594)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The paper explores the cultural construction of classification by identifying fundamental characteristics of classification and examining how these fit with other cultures. Foucault's method of discourse analysis is applied to selected texts an classification in two areas. The first area is classification originated in the dominant Western culture. The second area is classifications from indigenous cultures. It is concluded that classification research needs to have an increasing awareness of the cultural construction of classification schemes and to work with alternatives to approaches of fundamental universal principles of classification.

0.0082269255 = product of:
  0.024680775 = sum of:
    0.024680775 = product of:
      0.04936155 = sum of:
        0.04936155 = weight(_text_:22 in 6607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04936155 = score(doc=6607,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6607, 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=6607)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Probleme des Wiederaufbaus im wissenschaftlichen Bibliothekswesen: aus d. Verhandlungen des 1. Bibliothekartagung der britischen Zone in Hamburg vom 22.-24.10.1946

0.0081475405 = product of:
  0.02444262 = sum of:
    0.02444262 = weight(_text_:to in 971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02444262 = score(doc=971,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.29521468 = fieldWeight in 971, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=971)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper examines how classification schemes provide subject access. Concept arrangement before computers is compared to its role after machine-based exact match techniques have evolved. The change in retrieval techniques corresponds to a change in philosophy of knowledge. Classification schemes, emerging from Aristotelian philosophy, provide conceptual frameworks for direct human interaction to foster reference and communication. Computer-based systems provide access with a different emphasis on conceptual arrangement. Employing a philosophy of knowledge as facets, computer programs use word-frequency analyses, uncontrolled vocabulary, and feedback procedures to define subject access. Classification for machine processing optimizes the power of these systems. Though the influence of Aristotelian philosophy declines, structures for concept communication continue to be instrumental in the efficient operation of computer-based systems. Ongoing classification work can help direct vague inquiries and reflect human and social relationships to knowledge

0.0081475405 = product of:
  0.02444262 = sum of:
    0.02444262 = weight(_text_:to in 2532) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02444262 = score(doc=2532,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.29521468 = fieldWeight in 2532, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2532)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The current trend of simplifying user access to documents in public libraries in France has led to strong criticism of the traditional use of decimal classification, and growing popularity for classifying by centres of interest. The notion of locating documents 'where the reader expects to find them' does not bear reasoned analysis: this approach depends on the subjective attitudes of the reader, whose preconceptions are unknown. Public libraries serve readers of all types, and therefore the classification used must be based on general objective criteria. Argues for the retension of traditional encyclopedic classifications (UDC or Dewey), which despite their drawbacks, are based on subject structures known to everyone, and allow for updating to accommodate new concepts. Classification can operate with visual labelling systems, to simplify access: this approach provides ready identification of centres of interest without discarding the real advantages of universality.

0.0081475405 = product of:
  0.02444262 = sum of:
    0.02444262 = weight(_text_:to in 2153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02444262 = score(doc=2153,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.29521468 = fieldWeight in 2153, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2153)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The history of classified order relating to the Bavarian State Library dates back to the library's origins and the theoretical treatise its collections inspired. Many more classifications followed to facilitate practical access to the ever expanding collections, both in the open-access areas and in the closed stacks. The most comprehensive classifications used in the library are introduced in chronological order and as instruments to ensure the continuity of subject access in a kind of logical sequence: the Classified Shelf-Register of 1814, the Old Classified Catalogue 1501 - 1952 dating from the 1870s, the Hirschberger Catalogue 1953 - 1981, the Munich Classification of 1983 and the development of an Online Classification (DDC) based on the Dewey Decimal Classification from a predecessor in 1999 to announce the latest acquisitions in the special collection fields.

0.0081475405 = product of:
  0.02444262 = sum of:
    0.02444262 = weight(_text_:to in 2834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02444262 = score(doc=2834,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.29521468 = fieldWeight in 2834, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2834)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to document how Paul Otlet, founding-father of what is termed at present as "information science", attempted to provide a complete "image of the world" (and reality in general) by establishing the scientific discipline he dubbed "documentation". The paper also aims to focus on how Otlet represented human knowledge and reality in a systematic and unified way. Design/methodology/approach - A close reading of Otlet's primary works and some of his personal archives was undertaken. Findings - Most importantly, it is shown that Otlet's views on documentation were immersed in a cosmological, objectivist, humanitarian and ontological framework that is alien to contemporary information science. Correspondingly, his alleged affinity with positivism is reassessed. Originality/value - The philosophical foundations of the origins of information science are highlighted. Indirectly, this paper is relevant to the ongoing debate on realism and anti-realism in information science.

0.0081475405 = product of:
  0.02444262 = sum of:
    0.02444262 = weight(_text_:to in 3860) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02444262 = score(doc=3860,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.29521468 = fieldWeight in 3860, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3860)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The studies of library classifications generally interact with a historical approach that contextualizes the research and with the ideas related to classification that are typical of Philosophy. In the 19th century, the North-American philosopher and educator William Torrey Harris developed a book classification at the St. Louis Public School, based on Francis Bacon and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. The objective of the present study is to analyze Harris's classification, reflecting upon his theoretical and philosophical backgrounds in order to understand Harris's contribution to Knowledge Organization (KO). To achieve such objective, this study adopts a critical - descriptive approach for the analysis. The results show some influences of Bacon and Hegel in Harris's classification

Content

Beitrag bei: NASKO 2017: Visualizing Knowledge Organization: Bringing Focus to Abstract Realities. The sixth North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization (NASKO 2017), June 15-16, 2017, in Champaign, IL, USA.

0.007839975 = product of:
  0.023519924 = sum of:
    0.023519924 = weight(_text_:to in 5800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023519924 = score(doc=5800,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.28407046 = fieldWeight in 5800, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5800)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Shiyali Ramamrita Ranganathan's theory of classification spans a number of works over a number of decades. And while he was devoted to solving many problems in the practice of librarianship, and is known as the father of library science in India (Garfield, 1984), his work in classification revolves around one central concern. His classification research addressed the problems that arose from introducing new ideas into a scheme for classification, while maintaining a meaningful hierarchical and systematically arranged order of classes. This is because hierarchical and systematically arranged classes are the defining characteristic of useful classification. To lose this order is to through the addition of new classes is to introduce confusion, if not chaos, and to move toward a useless classification - or at least one that requires complete revision. In the following chapter, I outline the stages, and the elements of those stages, in Ranganathan's thought on classification from 1926-1972, as well as posthumous work that continues his agenda. And while facets figure prominently in all of these stages; but for Ranganathan to achieve his goal, he must continually add to this central feature of his theory of classification. I will close this chapter with an outline of persistent problems that represent research fronts for the field. Chief among these are what to do about scheme change and the open question about the rigor of information modeling in light of semantic web developments.

0.0077611795 = product of:
  0.023283537 = sum of:
    0.023283537 = weight(_text_:to in 1534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023283537 = score(doc=1534,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.28121543 = fieldWeight in 1534, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1534)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)