Walker, R.: Categorization
0.02
0.018507326 = product of:
0.09253663 = sum of:
0.09253663 = weight(_text_:books in 1019) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09253663 = score(doc=1019,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
0.051222645 = queryNorm
0.37378973 = fieldWeight in 1019, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1019)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Abstract
- It is a self-evident truth that there is a complete mismatch between the common forms of stock presentation and the observed patterns of public library use. It is sad, however, to see the term display dropped in favour of categorization, since desplay suggests the concept of periodic changes of categories. Fiction needs categorization, but to achieve consistency a basic all-embracing classification is called for. Or at least we should agree to some standard descriptors for the contents of a novel. This means that a librarian will be forced to analyse books and relate them to readers. In other words he must become a 'book person' which, however, is heresy in this mad management world
