Search (54 results, page 1 of 3)

0.04629186 = product of:
  0.20831338 = sum of:
    0.016935252 = weight(_text_:of in 345) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016935252 = score(doc=345,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 345, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=345)
    0.19137813 = weight(_text_:microcomputer in 345) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19137813 = score(doc=345,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.29124779 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.4342074 = idf(docFreq=70, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.6570973 = fieldWeight in 345, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.4342074 = idf(docFreq=70, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=345)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Many library buildings are nearing their space capacities. In order to make the most efficient use of existing stack space, librarians must carefully measure the rates of collection expansion and the amount of available shelf space. Describes an effort to quantify annual collection expansion and shelf space capacities using a microcomputer based spreadsheet program

Source

Journal of academic librarianship. 20(1994) no.3, S.156-161

0.031089585 = product of:
  0.09326875 = sum of:
    0.021169065 = weight(_text_:of in 852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021169065 = score(doc=852,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 852, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=852)
    0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020439833 = score(doc=852,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 852, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=852)
    0.051659852 = product of:
      0.103319705 = sum of:
        0.103319705 = weight(_text_:packages in 852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.103319705 = score(doc=852,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2706874 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.3816938 = fieldWeight in 852, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=852)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this article is to outline the approach taken to the reclassification of the library collection within a small multi-site college of higher education - whereby 160,000 volumes were converted from the BLISS system to the Dewey Decimal Classification system, over a period of 11 weeks during Summer 2004. Design/methodology/approach - An automated approach was taken whereby the Library Systems Supplier - Talis was commissioned to convert catalogue records using a batch process. Risk analysis and critical path analysis were used as tools to keep the project on schedule and provide quality control. Findings - An automated approach allowed the project to be completed on time, within budget and with minimal disruption to services. Project planning was crucial to the success of the project. This included mapping BLISS to Dewey numbers, recruitment of a student team, management of work packages and ensuring continuity of the Library Service during the project. Practical implications - Institutional support for the project was secured because of its relevance to the College's corporate agenda and the promise of a wider impact that the project would have in terms of modernisation of the library service. Originality/value - Despite the apparent lack of current articles on re-classification, many libraries are still grappling with ongoing retrospective cataloguing projects. This case study demonstrates how one institution approached the problem and demonstrates that an automated approach can yield benefits. It will be of use to other libraries thinking of, or involved with, similar conversions. The partnership role of the Library Management System Supplier is also highlighted.

0.021780707 = product of:
  0.06534212 = sum of:
    0.018148692 = weight(_text_:of in 4660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018148692 = score(doc=4660,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 4660, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4660)
    0.028615767 = weight(_text_:systems in 4660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028615767 = score(doc=4660,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 4660, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4660)
    0.018577661 = product of:
      0.037155323 = sum of:
        0.037155323 = weight(_text_:22 in 4660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037155323 = score(doc=4660,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4660, 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=4660)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

In the last 10 years a number of libraries in the Netherlands have developed akternative shelf arrangements to the standard SISO system. A survey undertaken at Felde children's library following the implementation of an alternative arrangement showed that children had been unaware of the change. In 1989 the Nederlands Bibliothekk en Lektuur Centrum (Dutch Centre for Libraries and Reading) began developing a system based on trials at 15 libraries. Further implementations of the system should take account of developments with automated catalogues

Footnote

Übers. des Titels: Almost as many systems as libraries: a study of alternative shelf arrangement schems

Source

Bibliotheek en samenleving. 23(1995) no.11, S.20-22

0.014199704 = product of:
  0.06389867 = sum of:
    0.023429861 = weight(_text_:of in 2473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023429861 = score(doc=2473,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.38244802 = fieldWeight in 2473, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2473)
    0.04046881 = weight(_text_:systems in 2473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04046881 = score(doc=2473,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 2473, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2473)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Of the many shelf arrangement systems available for sound recordings there are two main types: those that classify and those that do not. To determine how libraries are arranging their sound recording collections today, a questionnaire was sent to 123 academic music libraries with collections of 5.000 or more sound recordings. Although LCC is used in 78% of the libraries of the libraries for books and in 74% of the libraries for scores, it is used in only 12% of the libraries for sound recordings. Accession number is the clear choice of academic music libraries for the shelving of sound recordings with 66% of the libraries surveyed using it

0.011985633 = product of:
  0.053935345 = sum of:
    0.03270373 = weight(_text_:systems in 4494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03270373 = score(doc=4494,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 4494, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4494)
    0.021231614 = product of:
      0.042463228 = sum of:
        0.042463228 = weight(_text_:22 in 4494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042463228 = score(doc=4494,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4494, 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=4494)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Footnote

Übers. d. Titels: A national system urgently required: Leerdam and Weert public libraries experiment with alternative shelf location systems

Source

BibliotheekBlad. 2(1998) no.10/11, S.22-24

0.011016016 = product of:
  0.049572073 = sum of:
    0.020956306 = weight(_text_:of in 4485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020956306 = score(doc=4485,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 4485, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4485)
    0.028615767 = weight(_text_:systems in 4485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028615767 = score(doc=4485,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 4485, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4485)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Patrons often browse through books organized by a library classification system, looking for books to use and possibly circulate. This research is an examination of the clustering of similar books provided by a classification system and ways in which the books that patrons circulate are clustered. Measures of classification system performance are suggested and used to evaluate two test collections. Regression formulas are derived describing the relationships among the number of areas in which books were found (the number of stops a patron makes when browsing), the distances across a cluster, and the average number of books a patron circulates. Patrons were found usually to make more stops than there were books found at their average stop. Consequences for full-text document systems and online catalogs are suggested

0.010058393 = product of:
  0.045262765 = sum of:
    0.024822932 = weight(_text_:of in 3270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024822932 = score(doc=3270,freq=44.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.40518725 = fieldWeight in 3270, product of:
          6.6332498 = tf(freq=44.0), with freq of:
            44.0 = termFreq=44.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3270)
    0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 3270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020439833 = score(doc=3270,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 3270, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3270)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

The Philosophy Library at the University of Milan was born in the fifties by the merger of the two Institutes of Philosophy and the History of Philosophy. Once the restoration had been completed, it was necessary to devise a suitable classification system in order to arrange the books and to meet the new research needs of the Institutes. The project was untrusted to Prof. Corrado Mangione and Prof. Maria Assunta del Torre, with the theoretical contribution of Giuliana Sapori, chief Director of Central Library of the Faculty of Laws and Humanities. The model had been conceived as completely anew, without any reference toother existing classification systems. The inspiring principles were from one hand the choice for an open shelving system, from the other one the idea that the orientation criteria and the book search had to be user-friendly for everyone. This paper provides an in-depth analysis of the making-up of the call number as applied to each section of the collection, and how the scheme has been developed over the past fifty years. Points of strenght and weakness of the scheme are also discussed at the light of the technological innovations which have gradually affected the whole of the library activities, notably with the introduction of the electronic catalogue. The original classification scheme has maintened its coherence and functionality over time, in spite of the expansion of the collection and the automation of all stages of the classification process. This is the main reason to keep using it in the future.

Footnote

Beitrag eines Themenheftes "The philosophy of classifying philosophy"

0.008785326 = product of:
  0.039533965 = sum of:
    0.020956306 = weight(_text_:of in 913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020956306 = score(doc=913,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 913, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=913)
    0.018577661 = product of:
      0.037155323 = sum of:
        0.037155323 = weight(_text_:22 in 913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037155323 = score(doc=913,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 913, 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=913)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Describes a project designed to integrate art into the children's library at Espergaerde in Denmark. Explains the aims of the project, principally to make the use of the library an artistic experience, and the 3 tasks the project was to fulfil: the redesign of the interior using artwork by local artists; a change from the traditional arrangement of fiction; and provision of workshop facilities for children to exercise their artistic inclinations. Details how these tasks were accopmplished and discusses the results of the project, stressing the renewed appreciation of art and the importance of passing that on to children

Source

Scandinavian public library quarterly. 25(1992) no.1, S.20-22

0.008070363 = product of:
  0.036316633 = sum of:
    0.015876798 = weight(_text_:of in 3272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015876798 = score(doc=3272,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 3272, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3272)
    0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 3272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020439833 = score(doc=3272,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 3272, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3272)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

This paper focuses on the job undertaken between 2003 and 2004 in order to plan a new location arrangement for the Philosophy collection of one of the libraries at the University of Trieste. The paper describes the basic needs which played a fundamental role in the planning phase. Furthermore, it examines in detail how the most widely known classification systems - particularly the DDC- did not seem the best answer to the specific needs in this context. The solution was to develop an original classification system in order to answer the specific needs. The paper describes its development and the basis upon which it was built: the classification schemes used were those of the most authoritative periodical bibliographies in this field. Among them, the International Philosophical Bibliography system seemed to be closer to the continental tradition of the organization of knowledge in the discipline. Conclusions deal with the management of the transition from the old to the new system giving some information about the possible evaluation of the work that has been carried out.

Footnote

Beitrag eines Themenheftes "The philosophy of classifying philosophy"

0.007977327 = product of:
  0.035897974 = sum of:
    0.014666359 = weight(_text_:of in 31) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014666359 = score(doc=31,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.23940048 = fieldWeight in 31, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=31)
    0.021231614 = product of:
      0.042463228 = sum of:
        0.042463228 = weight(_text_:22 in 31) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042463228 = score(doc=31,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 31, 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=31)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

The inspiration for categorising of fiction has been the observation that this kind of arrangement serves those clients who look for books by browsing the shelves. The evidence for this is that catgorisation has increased loans of fiction and helped clients to find older literature that current reviews have already left behind

Source

Scandinavian public library quarterly. 25(1992) no.4, S.22-24,29

0.007895015 = product of:
  0.03552757 = sum of:
    0.010999769 = weight(_text_:of in 340) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010999769 = score(doc=340,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.17955035 = fieldWeight in 340, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=340)
    0.0245278 = weight(_text_:systems in 340) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0245278 = score(doc=340,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 340, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=340)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

For a variety of reasons, reclassification was a popular project in libraries in the 1960s. Although such projects have faded from the limelight, some of the reasons for doing them remain valid today, i.e., a need to cut processing costs, participation in cooperative ventures, the inconvenience caused by working with a collection split between two classification systems, and continuing changes in the Dewey schedules. This article compares the steps needed for reclassifying in a manual environment with those required when the library has an in-house computer system. The comparison shows how using the latter makes a reclassification project more feasible than it would be in a totally manual library. The article also discusses various issues associated with reclassification in an automated environment such as the problem posed by a frozen public catalog and the combining of reclassification and conversion projects.

0.0077724145 = product of:
  0.034975864 = sum of:
    0.019052157 = weight(_text_:of in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019052157 = score(doc=1858,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
    0.015923709 = product of:
      0.031847417 = sum of:
        0.031847417 = weight(_text_:22 in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031847417 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1858, 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=1858)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

The verification of the functionality of the Philosophy classification schema adopted at the Library of the Scuola Normale Superiore needs to take into account the context: the Library is both a special and a multidisciplinary library; its collections reflect the history of the SNS. The philosophy collection has a specialized and selective nature, as do others within the same Library; the Library is open shelves, and classification is used as a shelving and location device. Bearing in mind the above conditions, the second part of this paper examines the strengths and weaknesses of the schema in order to highlight its suitability to match a coherent classification of documents with the effective fruition by the users.

Date

9. 1.2010 14:22:20

Footnote

Beitrag eines Themenheftes "The philosophy of classifying philosophy"

0.0074464604 = product of:
  0.033509072 = sum of:
    0.0089812735 = weight(_text_:of in 787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0089812735 = score(doc=787,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.14660224 = fieldWeight in 787, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=787)
    0.0245278 = weight(_text_:systems in 787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0245278 = score(doc=787,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 787, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=787)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

This article presents a new idea on shelving printed books and finding books in libraries. The author advocates that traditional book classification number (TBCN) systems should be replaced by a better indexing method for books in libraries. The author proposes a new way of seeking books for library users wishing to locate them called a 'dynamic book subject number' (DBSN) system. The new system combines new indexing rules and automated system technology to create settings in which a book's 'subject number' can change rather than having a particular permanent classification number assigned to it. The new way encourages library users to seek books through a user-friendly cataloging system by choosing subjects from the embedded database. The database contains thousands of subjects with their corresponding Arabic codes. For printed books, the DBSN ushers in a new era in the relationship between library users and the books.

0.0074213347 = product of:
  0.033396006 = sum of:
    0.014818345 = weight(_text_:of in 883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014818345 = score(doc=883,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 883, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=883)
    0.018577661 = product of:
      0.037155323 = sum of:
        0.037155323 = weight(_text_:22 in 883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037155323 = score(doc=883,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 883, 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=883)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

As part of her doctoral dissertation at Brabant Catholic University in the Netherlands A. Oomens recently held a survey to determine the relative merits of author and subject arrangements for non fiction collections. Although users browsing through the collections were more likely to find material of interest via a subject arrangement, those looking for a particular title were best served by an author arrangement. All users interviewed preferred the arrangement with which they were familiar

Source

BibliotheekBlad. 1(1997) no.21, S.22-23

0.0066943 = product of:
  0.03012435 = sum of:
    0.014200641 = weight(_text_:of in 125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014200641 = score(doc=125,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.23179851 = fieldWeight in 125, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=125)
    0.015923709 = product of:
      0.031847417 = sum of:
        0.031847417 = weight(_text_:22 in 125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031847417 = score(doc=125,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 125, 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=125)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Reclassification was a popular trend during the 1960s and 1970s for many academic libraries wanting to change from Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) to Library of Congress (LC) Classification. In 2002, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale's Morris Library changed from DDC to LC. If one academic library recently converted, might other DDC academic libraries consider switching, too? Conversely, for those academic libraries that remain with DDC, what are the reasons they continue with it? A survey of thirty-four DDC academic libraries in the United States and Canada determined what factors influence these libraries to continue using DDC, and if reclassification is something they have considered or are considering. The survey also investigated whether patrons of these DDC libraries prefer LC and if their preference influences the library's decision to reclassify. Results from the survey indicate that the issue of reclassification is being considered by some of these libraries even though, overall, they are satisfied with DDC. The study was unable to determine if patrons' preference for a classification scheme influenced a library's decision to reclassify.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.006599831 = product of:
  0.02969924 = sum of:
    0.008467626 = weight(_text_:of in 344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008467626 = score(doc=344,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.13821793 = fieldWeight in 344, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=344)
    0.021231614 = product of:
      0.042463228 = sum of:
        0.042463228 = weight(_text_:22 in 344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042463228 = score(doc=344,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 344, 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=344)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

The Colorado University at Boulder Libraries, Leonard H. Gemmill Engineering Library, USA, uses mobile compact shelving for its open stack collection. Describes the library collection, the shelves, configuration and equipment, capacity and use, maintenance and repairs, and the affect of power cuts and flooding. Discusses ths staff and users' reactions and the lessons learnt

Source

Colorado libraries. 22(1996) no.1, S.29-32

0.0063590594 = product of:
  0.057231534 = sum of:
    0.057231534 = weight(_text_:systems in 6801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057231534 = score(doc=6801,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.47535738 = fieldWeight in 6801, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6801)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Source

Intelligent multimedia information retrieval systems and management: RIAO'94 Conference Proceedings. Vol.1

0.0041248943 = product of:
  0.018562024 = sum of:
    0.005292266 = weight(_text_:of in 2052) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005292266 = score(doc=2052,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.086386204 = fieldWeight in 2052, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2052)
    0.013269759 = product of:
      0.026539518 = sum of:
        0.026539518 = weight(_text_:22 in 2052) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026539518 = score(doc=2052,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2052, 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=2052)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Footnote

Rez. in: Mitteilungsblatt VdB NW N.F. 45(1995) H.3, S.332-333 (H. Lohse) [Auch wenn H. Lohse meint, das Buch bzw. die zugrundeliegende Assessorarbeit hätte nicht geschrieben werden müssen, so liefert doch gerade seine Rezension den Beweis, wie notwendig diese Arbeit war]; BuB 47(1995) H.10, S.955-959 (I. Nöther) ["Diese von einem Berufsanfänger vorgelegte Arbeit ist eine Spitzenleistung, ein Meisterwerk, auf das der Autor, seine Ausbildungsstätte sowie der Verlag und der Herausgeber der Reihe sotz sein können. Für jeden, der sich heute und in Zukunft mit Fragen der Klassifikation befaßt, ist die Lektüre dieses Buches Pflicht"]; Bibliothek: Forschung und Praxis 20(1996) H.1, S.134-135 (W. Gödert); Knowledge organization 22(1995) no.3/4, S.178 (B. Lorenz); Journal of documentation 51(1995) no.4, S.434-437 (J.S. Andrews)

0.002730383 = product of:
  0.024573447 = sum of:
    0.024573447 = weight(_text_:of in 3667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024573447 = score(doc=3667,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.40111488 = fieldWeight in 3667, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3667)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

There seems to be general agreement in the library community that a predictably ordered system of classification, leading to easy browsability of a library collection either in the stacks or in an OPAC, is an indispensible requirement for the kind of access patrons have come to expect, and for the reasonable success of the searching strategies they normally use. In this vein, examines the intrinsic value of browsing. In addition, with the help of some rough data compiled during a test conducted at Cornell University in the spring of 1994, estimates the cost of maintaining the collocative and alphabetical integrity of shelflist files for works by or about individual literary authors

0.002730383 = product of:
  0.024573447 = sum of:
    0.024573447 = weight(_text_:of in 1973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024573447 = score(doc=1973,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.40111488 = fieldWeight in 1973, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1973)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

In the recent years, several libraries in the United States have been experimenting with Book Industry Standards and Communications (BISAC), the classification system of the book industry, as an alternative to the Dewey Decimal Classification. Although rarely discussed, these cases of implementation of BISAC arguably resemble other past cases of replacement of traditional classifications that received the name of reader-interest classifications. In this article, a comparison of the BISAC cases to the previous cases of reader-interest classifications is taken in order to determine if the current application of BISAC to libraries is susceptible to the same problems, dangers, and ends as occurred in the past.