Search (74 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × theme_ss:"International bedeutende Universalklassifikationen"
  1. Mitchell, J.S.; Vizine-Goetz, D.: Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) (2009) 0.02 
    0.018677972 = product of:
  0.08405087 = sum of:
    0.06711562 = weight(_text_:applications in 3873) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06711562 = score(doc=3873,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.38913056 = fieldWeight in 3873, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3873)
    0.016935252 = weight(_text_:of in 3873) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016935252 = score(doc=3873,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 3873, 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=3873)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    This entry discusses the Dewey Decimal Classification's value proposition as a general knowledge organization system in terms of basic design, history, ongoing development, translations, mappings, applications, and research. The authors conclude with prospects for use of the DDC inside and outside of libraries.
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
  2. Beghtol, C.: Knowledge domains : multidisciplinarity and bibliographic classification systems (1998) 0.02 
    0.016808135 = product of:
  0.07563661 = sum of:
    0.015556021 = weight(_text_:of in 2028) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015556021 = score(doc=2028,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 2028, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2028)
    0.06008059 = weight(_text_:systems in 2028) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06008059 = score(doc=2028,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.4990213 = fieldWeight in 2028, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2028)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    Bibliographic classification systems purport to organize the world of knowledge for information storage and retrieval purposes in libraries and bibliographies, both manual and online. The major systems that have predominated during the 20th century were originally predicated on the academic disciplines. This structural principle is no longer adequate because multidisciplinray knowledge production has overtaken more traditional disciplinary perspectives and produced communities of cooperation whose documents cannot be accomodated in a disciplinary structure. This paper addresses the problems the major classifications face, reports some attempts to revise these systems to accomodate multidisciplinary works more appropriately, and describes some theoretical research perspectives that attempt to reorient classification research toward the pluralistic needs of multidisciplinary knowledge creation and the perspectives of different discourse communities. Traditionally, the primary desiderata of classification systems were mutual exclusivity and joint exhaustivity. The need to respond to multidisciplinary research may mean that hospitality will replace mutual exclusivity and joint exhaustivity as the most needed and useful characteristics of classification systems in both theory and practice
  3. McIlwaine, I.C.: Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) (2009) 0.02 
    0.016731909 = product of:
  0.075293586 = sum of:
    0.05872617 = weight(_text_:applications in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05872617 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.34048924 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
    0.016567415 = weight(_text_:of in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016567415 = score(doc=3773,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    This entry outlines the history, application, and nature of the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC). It explains its structure, management, revision, and the many changes that have taken place since the Task Force for UDC Development reported in 1990, and the UDC Consortium was formed. This led to the creation of the machine-readable database, or Master Reference File (MRF), consisting of some 66,000 terms, which forms the basis of all published editions and is revised and updated annually. Revision procedures and applications in an online environment are noted and the potential for future development discussed.
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
  4. Zins, C.; Santos, P.L.V.A.C.: Mapping the knowledge covered by library classification systems (2011) 0.02 
    0.016421774 = product of:
  0.07389798 = sum of:
    0.019052157 = weight(_text_:of in 4449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019052157 = score(doc=4449,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 4449, 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=4449)
    0.054845825 = weight(_text_:systems in 4449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054845825 = score(doc=4449,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.45554203 = fieldWeight in 4449, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4449)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    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.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.5, S.877-901
  5. Swaydan, N.M.: ¬The universal classification and the needs of libraries in developing countries (1982) 0.01 
    0.014892921 = product of:
  0.067018144 = sum of:
    0.017962547 = weight(_text_:of in 46) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017962547 = score(doc=46,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 46, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=46)
    0.0490556 = weight(_text_:systems in 46) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0490556 = score(doc=46,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 46, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=46)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Source
    Universal classification I: subject analysis and ordering systems. Proc. of the 4th Int. Study Conf. on Classification Research, Augsburg, 28.6.-2.7.1982. Ed.: I. Dahlberg
  6. Mowery, R.L.: ¬The "¬trend to LC" in college and university libraries (1975) 0.01 
    0.014485389 = product of:
  0.06518425 = sum of:
    0.018934188 = weight(_text_:of in 1152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018934188 = score(doc=1152,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.3090647 = fieldWeight in 1152, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1152)
    0.046250064 = weight(_text_:systems in 1152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046250064 = score(doc=1152,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.38414678 = fieldWeight in 1152, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1152)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    Seeking to document the extent to which libraries of four-year colleges and universities have adopted the LCC system, this study surveys the classification systems used by the libraries of 1.160 accredited four-year-colleges and universities. The LC system is presently being used by more than half of these libraries; however, throughout 1968-71 the "trend to LC" clearly lost momentum. Data are provided on the extent to which the Library of Congress and The DDC systems were used in 1967 and 1971 by libraries of various sizes and categories
  7. Piros, A.: ¬The thought behind the symbol : about the automatic interpretation and representation of UDC numbers (2017) 0.01 
    0.014423447 = product of:
  0.06490551 = sum of:
    0.016735615 = weight(_text_:of in 3853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016735615 = score(doc=3853,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 3853, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3853)
    0.048169892 = weight(_text_:software in 3853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048169892 = score(doc=3853,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.30993375 = fieldWeight in 3853, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3853)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    Analytico-synthetic and faceted classifications, such as Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) provide facilities to express pre-coordinated subject statements using syntactic relations. In this case, the relevance, in the process of UDC-based information retrieval, can be determined by extracting the meaning of the classmarks as precisely as is possible. The central question here is how the identification mentioned above can be supported by automatic means and an analysis of the structure of complex classmarks appears to be an obvious requirement. Many bibliographic sources contain complex UDC classmarks which are stored as simple text strings and on which it is very difficult to perform any meaningful information discovery. The paper presents results from a phase of ongoing research focused on developing a new platform-independent, machine-processable data format capable of representing the whole syntactic structure of the composite UDC numbers to support their further automatic processing. An algorithm that can produce the representation of the numbers in such a format directly from their designations has also been developed and implemented. The research also includes implementing conversion methods to provide outputs that can be employed by other software directly and, as a service, make them available for other software. The paper provides an overview of the solutions developed and implemented since 2015 and outlines future research plans.
  8. Kleiber, K.; Lindpointner, R.: DDC in Europa : Workshop "The use of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) in Europe: recent developments and future perspectives" und "Meeting of the European DDC users' group" (2007) 0.01 
    0.012062385 = product of:
  0.036187153 = sum of:
    0.0044906368 = weight(_text_:of in 1286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0044906368 = score(doc=1286,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.07330112 = fieldWeight in 1286, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1286)
    0.020436753 = weight(_text_:software in 1286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020436753 = score(doc=1286,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.13149375 = fieldWeight in 1286, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1286)
    0.011259764 = product of:
      0.022519529 = sum of:
        0.022519529 = weight(_text_:22 in 1286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022519529 = score(doc=1286,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.16414827 = fieldWeight in 1286, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1286)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    Content
    Der dann folgende Vortrag von Joan Mitchell mit dem programmatischen Titel "Locality and universality in the DDC" gab zuerst einen Überblick über die laufenden Übersetzungsprojekte, bezogen auf die Ed. 22, nämlich: Französisch, Italienisch, Spanisch, Griechisch, Arabisch und Chinesisch. Bezogen auf die Abridged Ed. 14 außerdem: Hebräisch und Vietnamesisch. Sie erwähnte auch den Einsatz von Dewey bei internationalen Projekten wie der "World Digital Library". Der zentrale Punkt des Vortrags betraf dann den Spagat zwischen ,Localization and Interoperability', d.h. zwischen Anpassung an regionale Gegebenheiten (wie z.B. Unterschiede in den Bereichen des Rechts- und Erziehungssystems) auf der einen Seite und Festhalten an der Durchgängigkeit der Bedeutung über alle Sprachen und Kulturen hinweg. Wie auch Magda Heiner-Freiling in ihrem Vortrag hinwies, hat sich die amerikanisch geprägte DDC im Zuge der Übersetzungsprojekte zwar schrittweise den Bedürfnissen der Benutzer in anderen Erdteilen geöffnet, dennoch bestehen noch zahlreiche Schwierigkeiten. Das von Heiner-Freiling erwähnte Beispiel der Pädagogik zeigte aber auch, dass Vorsicht bei Alleingängen auf nationaler Ebene geboten ist, da z.B. im Zuge des Bologna-Prozesses auch in Europa amerikanische institutionelle Strukturen und Terminologie im Bildungswesen Einzug halten. Weitere Vorträge befassten sich mit der Arbeit an elektronischen Verfahren zur automatischen Analyse von DDC-Notationen (Ulrike Reiner aus Göttingen), mit der DDC-Übersetzungs-Software, die für die Übersetzung ins Deutsche entwickelt wurde und nun auch in allen anderen Sprachen im Einsatz ist (Peter Werling, Fa. Pansoft) bzw. mit der DDC-Suche in verschiedenen Webportalen (Lars G. Svensson, DNB). Der abschließende Vortrag von Magda Heiner-Freiling (DNB) ging dann wieder ins Programmatische mit dem Vorschlag, eine gemeinsame European DDC Users Group (EDUG) zu gründen, um gemeinsame Anliegen der europäischen Dewey-User, was z.B. die anfangs erwähnten Probleme in einzelnen Bereichen betrifft, gemeinsam gegenüber den amerikanischen Herausgebern zu vertreten, um so mehr Einfluss auf die künftige Entwicklung der DDC zu haben.
    Wer sich näher für einzelne Themen interessiert, hat die Möglichkeit, auf der Homepage der Schweizer Nationalbibliothek die Präsentationsunterlagen der einzelnen Vorträge einzusehen (http://www.nb.admin.ch/slb/slb_professionnel/projektarbeit/00729/01615/01675/index.html?lang=de). Ziel des zweiten Tages war die Gründung einer europäischen DDC-Anwendergruppe zum Zweck der Vernetzung und Planung für die gemeinsame Entwicklungsarbeit. Anwesend waren Vertreterinnen der Nationalbibliotheken von Großbritannien, Deutschland, Frankreich, Schweden, Norwegen, Italien, Schweiz und Österreich sowie eine Vertreterin von OCLC. Eingeladen hatten die Nationalbibliotheken von Deutschland und der Schweiz. Vormittags wurde eine allgemeine Diskussion über die Ziele und Möglichkeiten einer solchen Anwendergruppe sowie allgemein über die Vorteile einer DDC-Anwendung in Europa diskutiert. Ziele von EDUG könnten sein: - Monitoring der europäischen DDC-Anwendungen - Kenntnis der unterschiedlichen Anwendungsregeln in den verschiedenen Ländern - Zugang auch zu den DDC-Übersetzungen in anderen Sprachen samt Expansionen - Zusammenarbeit beim Angebot von "built numbers" Zusammenarbeit mit OCLC als Vertreterin von europäischen Anliegen (die am Vortag ausführlich angesprochen worden waren) - Harmonisierung der Änderungen in den verschiedensprachigen Ausgaben (21./22. Ed., unterschiedliche Erweiterungen, anderer Sprachgebrauch) - Kooperation bei der Realisierung von technischen Plänen wie z.B. die automatische Klassifikation von Online-Dokumenten oder dem Mapping zu anderen Klassifikationssystemen - Weitergabe von Know-how und Erfahrungen an andere Interessierte Spontan wurden drei Arbeitsgruppen ins Leben gerufen, und zwar eine für technische Angelegenheiten und zwei inhaltliche für die kritischen Bereiche Recht und Erziehung. Nachmittags wurden die Satzungen von EDUG diskutiert und überarbeitet. Bei vielen Punkten wurde Übereinkunft erzielt. Einzelne Fragen blieben noch offen und sollen beim nächsten Treffen - wahrscheinlich im April 2008 in Frankfurt - endgültig fixiert werden."
  9. Mcllwaine, I.C.: ¬The Universal Decimal Classification : a response to a challenge (2006) 0.01 
    0.011876687 = product of:
  0.053445093 = sum of:
    0.020741362 = weight(_text_:of in 155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020741362 = score(doc=155,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.33856338 = fieldWeight in 155, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=155)
    0.03270373 = weight(_text_:systems in 155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03270373 = score(doc=155,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 155, 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=155)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    Examines the changes and trends in the developments and revisions of UDC in the context of a critique made by Neelameghan in 1972 on the need for a theoretical basis for UDC. The impact of Ranganathan's faceted approach as also his General Theory of Classification on the revision of UDC has been explained with illustrations from the recent revisions of UDC with particular emphasis on developments in the last decade.
    Source
    Knowledge organization, information systems and other essays: Professor A. Neelameghan Festschrift. Ed. by K.S. Raghavan and K.N. Prasad
  10. Williamson, N.: Knowledge integration and classification schemes (2003) 0.01 
    0.011368555 = product of:
  0.051158495 = sum of:
    0.018454762 = weight(_text_:of in 2736) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018454762 = score(doc=2736,freq=38.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.30123898 = fieldWeight in 2736, product of:
          6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
            38.0 = termFreq=38.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2736)
    0.03270373 = weight(_text_:systems in 2736) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03270373 = score(doc=2736,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 2736, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2736)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    A work in progress. An analysis of the handling of the domain "environmental science" in three universal classification schemes. Attention is given to problems of primary location, interdisciplinarity, degree of scatter, tenninology and structure of the domain. 1. Introduction Many traditional tools for organizing and providing access to recorded knowledge have become increasingly inadequate in responding to the changing requirements for effective organization and retrieval. The universal classification systems have been primary targets for criticism. In varying degrees they have been proven too rigid and somewhat limited as tools of modern knowledge organization. These inadequacies can be attributed to several significant factors - the changing nature of knowledge itself, the emergence of new domains, the realignment of old ones, and the development of very large databases. Also, more and more, as new technologies become available, there is increasing emphasis an the retrieval of facts as opposed to the retrieval of whole documents. In particular, the Internet encourages information seeking at a macro-level while the major universal systems were designed to organize information at a macro level. Moreover, there is a growing body of research and practical application aimed at improving the situation. This papers examines three of the best known universal classification systems the Dewey Decimal (DDC), Universal Decimal (UDC) and Library of Congress (LCC) classification systems in the light of their ability to respond to the changing nature of information itself. Recent research is briefly examined for its applicability to them. Environmental science, a recently emerging domain, is used as a basis for the analysis.
    Source
    Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
  11. Salah, A.A.; Gao, C.; Suchecki, K.; Scharnhorst, A.; Smiraglia, R.P.: ¬The evolution of classification systems : ontogeny of the UDC (2012) 0.01 
    0.011298507 = product of:
  0.050843284 = sum of:
    0.022227516 = weight(_text_:of in 825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022227516 = score(doc=825,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.36282203 = fieldWeight in 825, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=825)
    0.028615767 = weight(_text_:systems in 825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028615767 = score(doc=825,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 825, 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=825)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    To classify is to put things in meaningful groups, but the criteria for doing so can be problematic. Study of evolution of classification includes ontogenetic analysis of change in classification over time. We present an empirical analysis of the UDC over the entire period of its development. We demonstrate stability in main classes, with major change driven by 20th century scientific developments. But we also demonstrate a vast increase in the complexity of auxiliaries. This study illustrates an alternative to Tennis scheme-versioning method.
    Source
    Categories, contexts and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India. Eds.: Neelameghan, A. u. K.S. Raghavan
  12. Thomas, A.R.: Bibliographic classification : the ideas and achievements of Henry E. Bliss (1997) 0.01 
    0.010715243 = product of:
  0.048218597 = sum of:
    0.01960283 = weight(_text_:of in 3748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01960283 = score(doc=3748,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 3748, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3748)
    0.028615767 = weight(_text_:systems in 3748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028615767 = score(doc=3748,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 3748, 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=3748)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    Reviews the ideas and achievements of Henry E. Bliss concerning his Bliss Classification Scheme (BC), based on material in the Henry E. Bliss Papers at Columbia University, New York. Describes his views on various aspects of classification: its function; arrangements; adaptability; and notation. Discusses the role and qualifications of classification staff. Notes the advantages and disadvantages of standard systems, including: LCC, DDC, and UDC. Explores the origins, evolution, publication, and impact of the original BC and its relationship to the radical revision of the BC, 2nd ed.
  13. Lund, B.; Agbaji, D.: Use of Dewey Decimal Classification by academic libraries in the United States (2018) 0.01 
    0.010715243 = product of:
  0.048218597 = sum of:
    0.01960283 = weight(_text_:of in 5181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01960283 = score(doc=5181,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 5181, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5181)
    0.028615767 = weight(_text_:systems in 5181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028615767 = score(doc=5181,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 5181, 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=5181)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    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.
  14. Mitchell, J.S.: DDC 22: Dewey in the world, the world in Dewey (2004) 0.01 
    0.010494343 = product of:
  0.047224544 = sum of:
    0.017552461 = weight(_text_:of in 2644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017552461 = score(doc=2644,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.28651062 = fieldWeight in 2644, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2644)
    0.029672083 = product of:
      0.059344165 = sum of:
        0.059344165 = weight(_text_:22 in 2644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059344165 = score(doc=2644,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.43256867 = fieldWeight in 2644, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2644)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    In 2003, OCLC published Dewey Decimal Classification and Relative Index, Edition 22 (DDC 22), in print and Web versions. The changes and updates in the new edition reflect a modern view of knowledge structures and address the general needs of Dewey users. The content of DDC 22 has been shaped by a number of social, geopolitical, and technical trends. The World Wide Web has provided a vehicle for more frequent distribution of updates to the DDC, and a medium for direct communication with Dewey users around the world. In addition to updating the system itself, other strategies are needed to accommodate the needs of the global Dewey user community. Translation of the system is one approach; another is mapping. Mapping terminology to the DDC is a strategy for supporting effective local implementation of the system while maintaining the internal cohesiveness of the DDC. This paper explores the usefulness of mapping terminology from English-language general subject headings lists produced outside the U.S.
    Object
    DDC-22
    Source
    Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  15. McIlwaine, I.C.; Mitchell, J.S.: ¬The new ecumenism : exploration of a DDC / UDC view of religion (2006) 0.01 
    0.010392102 = product of:
  0.04676446 = sum of:
    0.018148692 = weight(_text_:of in 229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018148692 = score(doc=229,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 229, 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=229)
    0.028615767 = weight(_text_:systems in 229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028615767 = score(doc=229,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 229, 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=229)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    This paper explores the feasibility of using the Universal Decimal Classification's revised religion scheme as the framework for an alternative view of 200 Religion in the Dewey Decimal Classification, and as a potential model for future revision. The study investigates the development of a top-level crosswalk between the two systems, and a detailed mapping using Buddhism as a case study.
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a global learning society: Proceedings of the 9th International ISKO Conference, 4-7 July 2006, Vienna, Austria. Hrsg.: G. Budin, C. Swertz u. K. Mitgutsch
  16. Lorenz, B.: ¬Die DDC im Umfeld der Entwicklung dezimaler Klassifikationen (2008) 0.01 
    0.009668509 = product of:
  0.043508288 = sum of:
    0.023068454 = weight(_text_:of in 2152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023068454 = score(doc=2152,freq=38.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.37654874 = fieldWeight in 2152, product of:
          6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
            38.0 = termFreq=38.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2152)
    0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 2152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020439833 = score(doc=2152,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 2152, 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=2152)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    The decimal system is one system of a number of possible systems of ordering - and a very symbolic also. The ordering in ten chapters, themes, numbers, etc. you can find often in history. Indeed Dewey is not the genius-founder of decimal classification (against a number of authors)! For ordering and structuring separate schemes within a classification DDC creates a number of important negative solutions, e.g. in the main classes the 'lost' of physics and of medicine as special schemes: Nearly a catastrophe in the times of STM! And against an enormous tradition like Leibniz 1646 - 1716) et alii! Compare Bliss: The Bliss-Classification gives space for 6 numbers »sciences« in a context of 26 classes. Therefore the result in short: DDC (and UDC of course!) are »flowers« of the past, of the first decades of century 20! As a fact the Decimal Classification within the tradition of Melvil Dewey is not a final work: See the increasing number of newly constructed decimal classifications during the years 80 and 90 of the 20th century! Nevertheless DDC is a very great (problem and) solution in its development, internationality, reception - and edge-stone for many thinkers and librarians throughout the world - and an important example for modern translational work! Magda Heiner-Freiling has given to us a great stone for the edifice of Modern DDC: Requiescat in pace!
    Source
    New pespectives on subject indexing and classification: essays in honour of Magda Heiner-Freiling. Red.: K. Knull-Schlomann, u.a
  17. Comaroni, J.P.: Use of the Dewey Decimal Classification in the United States and Canada (1978) 0.01 
    0.009335005 = product of:
  0.04200752 = sum of:
    0.023429861 = weight(_text_:of in 1151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023429861 = score(doc=1151,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.38244802 = fieldWeight in 1151, 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=1151)
    0.018577661 = product of:
      0.037155323 = sum of:
        0.037155323 = weight(_text_:22 in 1151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037155323 = score(doc=1151,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1151, 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=1151)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    A summary of a survey of the use of the DDC in libraries of the United States and Canada is presented. (5% of alle libraries in the United States and Canada use DDC; of these are at least 75% use the most recent full or abridges edition. Librarians wish to have DDC revised continuously, but they do not want the meanings of numbers changed. Any assistance that can be provided in the application of DDC is welcome. Most of the larger libraries do not believe zhat the current index provides sufficient assistance. Divisions needing revision are listed with an index number reflecting priority. DDC is seen to be warmly regarded by librarians in general and by public service librarians in particular
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 22(1978), S.402-408
  18. Hjoerland, B.; Albrechtsen, H.: ¬An analysis of some trends in classification research (1999) 0.01 
    0.009097043 = product of:
  0.040936694 = sum of:
    0.02049686 = weight(_text_:of in 6391) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02049686 = score(doc=6391,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.33457235 = fieldWeight in 6391, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6391)
    0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 6391) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020439833 = score(doc=6391,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 6391, 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=6391)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    This paper takes a second look at three prevailing main themes in knowledge organization: i) the academic disciplines as the main structural principle; ii) the fiction/non-fiction distinction; and iii) the appropriate unit of analysis in online retrieval systems. The history and origin of bibliographic classification [Dewey, Bliss, Mills, Beghtol] are discussed from the perspective of pragmatist philosophy and social studies of science [Kuhn, Merton, Reich]. Choices of structural principles in different schemes are found to rely on more or less implicit philosophical foundations, ranging from rationalism to pragmatism. It is further shown how the increasing application of faceted structures as basic structural principles in universal classification schemes [DDC, UDC] impose rationalistic principles and structures for knowledge organization which are not in alignment with the development of knowledge in the covered disciplines. Further evidence of rationalism in knowledge organization is the fiction/non-fiction distinction, excluding the important role of artistic resources for, in particular, humanistic research. Finally, for the analysis of appropriate bibliographic unit, it is argued that there is a need to shift towards a semiotic approach, founded on an understanding of intertextuality, rather than applying standard principles of hierarchical decomposition of documents. It is concluded that a change in classification research is needed, founded on a more historical and social understanding of knowledge
  19. Hajdu Barat, A.: Knowledge organization of the Universal Decimal Classification : new solutions, user friendly methods from Hungary (2004) 0.01 
    0.008659224 = product of:
  0.038966507 = sum of:
    0.015841477 = weight(_text_:of in 2649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015841477 = score(doc=2649,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.25858206 = fieldWeight in 2649, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2649)
    0.023125032 = weight(_text_:systems in 2649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023125032 = score(doc=2649,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.19207339 = fieldWeight in 2649, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2649)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    This paper aims at exploring the changes in the role and representation of information retrieval languages, particularly the UDC system in the digital, online environment and the Internet. The Totalzoom Technology takes a different approach, with the help of which even a lay user can easily navigate in the "informational space". This system follows the free associative nature of human thinking. Technically, it works with the wide degree of freedom afforded by a logical-associative network, coupled with a hierarchical search tree as an inner auxiliary structure.
    Content
    1. Introduction The use of classical classification methods are a strong tradition in Hungary. One of the most widespread systems is the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC). We can find it in every type of library and at various levels. Perhaps it is not an overstatement to say that every library has used the UDC at least once in its history, and most of them still use it. Such standardization has been very wide and desirable, although the UDC has not become as popular a system among users everywhere as it has in Hungary. Naturally there are other information retrieval languages, too. They have been used by many libraries, but generally these institutions build their own subject system, own thesaurus, etc. There have also been attempts at creating a Hungarian General Subject s, like a Library of Congress Subject Headings or Regeln für den Schlagwortkatalog. Another project was the KÖZTAURUSZ (Comprehensive Thesaurus for the Public Libraries) and the National Széchényi Library's thesaurus. To what do we owe such a variety of approaches? The typical answer of 15-20 years ago was that the UDC lacked flexibility, its codes could not readily be used in integrated library systems, its terms were out of date and not concrete enough, etc.
    Source
    Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  20. Martel, C.: Classification: a brief conspectus of present day library practice (1985) 0.01 
    0.00824294 = product of:
  0.03709323 = sum of:
    0.020741362 = weight(_text_:of in 3623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020741362 = score(doc=3623,freq=48.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.33856338 = fieldWeight in 3623, product of:
          6.928203 = tf(freq=48.0), with freq of:
            48.0 = termFreq=48.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3623)
    0.016351866 = weight(_text_:systems in 3623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016351866 = score(doc=3623,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.1358164 = fieldWeight in 3623, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3623)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    It has been generally recognized that the Library of Congress Classification, developed at the turn of the century, has been based an practical rather than theoreti cal or philosophical considerations. Unlike most of the other library classification systems, which originated from individual minds, the Library of Congress Classification system was the result of corporate efforts. Nonetheless, there were a number of individuals who, in the early stages of its development, provided guidance regarding the general framework and direction of the scheme. The most important among these was Charles Martel (1860-1945) who was Chief Classifier at the Library of Congress when the system was first developed. In a paper read before the New Zealand Library Association in April 1911, from which the following excerpt has been taken, Martel gave his views concerning library classification in general and provided a glimpse of the rationale behind the Library of Congress Classification system in particular. In the following excerpt, Martel discusses the basis of the Library of Congress Classification system to be not "the scientific order of subjects ... [but] rather [a] convenient sequence of the various groups ... of books." This is the "literary warrant" an which the Library of Congress system has been based. With regard to the notation, Martel argues for brevity in preference to symmetry or mnemonics. Brevity of notation has since been recognized as one of the greatest advantages of the Library of Congress system as a device for shelf arrangement of books. Martel outlines seven groupings used in the system for subarranging books an the subject, first by form and then by subject subdivisions. This pattern, known as Martel's "seven points," has served as the general framework in individual classes and provided the most significant unifying factor for individual classes in the system, which contain many unique or disparate characteristics.
    Source
    Theory of subject analysis: a sourcebook. Ed.: L.M. Chan, et al

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 67
  • d 5
  • f 2
  • More… Less…

Themes