Search (29 results, page 1 of 2)

0.022076678 = product of:
  0.08830671 = sum of:
    0.06993098 = weight(_text_:work in 2550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06993098 = score(doc=2550,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.49167252 = fieldWeight in 2550, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2550)
    0.018375728 = product of:
      0.036751457 = sum of:
        0.036751457 = weight(_text_:22 in 2550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036751457 = score(doc=2550,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13569894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03875087 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

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

0.018868534 = product of:
  0.075474136 = sum of:
    0.057098407 = weight(_text_:work in 75) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057098407 = score(doc=75,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.40144894 = fieldWeight in 75, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=75)
    0.018375728 = product of:
      0.036751457 = sum of:
        0.036751457 = weight(_text_:22 in 75) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036751457 = score(doc=75,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13569894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03875087 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 75, 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=75)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

Abstract

Describes the history and origins of the International Institute of Bibliography, founded in 1895 and which later became the FID. Outlines the work of Paul Otlet and his colleagues in developing the idea of universal bibliographic control through the Répertoire Bibliographique Universel and the emergence of the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) as the means of its classifies arrangement. Stresses the key role played by this work in developing the main concepts of information science and documentation

Source

International forum on information and documentation. 22(1997) no.2, S.3-15

0.01617303 = product of:
  0.06469212 = sum of:
    0.048941493 = weight(_text_:work in 538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048941493 = score(doc=538,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.3440991 = fieldWeight in 538, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=538)
    0.015750622 = product of:
      0.031501245 = sum of:
        0.031501245 = weight(_text_:22 in 538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031501245 = score(doc=538,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13569894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03875087 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

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

0.008145229 = product of:
  0.06516183 = sum of:
    0.06516183 = product of:
      0.13032366 = sum of:
        0.13032366 = weight(_text_:aufsatzsammlung in 86) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13032366 = score(doc=86,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.25424787 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03875087 = queryNorm
            0.51258504 = fieldWeight in 86, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=86)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

RSWK

Naturwissenschaften / Klassifikation / Geschichte 1420-1950 / Aufsatzsammlung (BSZ)

Subject

Naturwissenschaften / Klassifikation / Geschichte 1420-1950 / Aufsatzsammlung (BSZ)

0.007492605 = product of:
  0.05994084 = sum of:
    0.05994084 = weight(_text_:work in 869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05994084 = score(doc=869,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.4214336 = fieldWeight in 869, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=869)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

James Duff Brown was an influential and energetic librarian in Great Britain in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. His Subject Classification has characteristics that were unusual and idiosyncratic during his own time, but his work deserves recognition as one of the precursors of modern bibliographic classification systems. This article discusses a number of theories and classification practices that Brown developed. In particular, it investigates his views on the order of main classes, on the phenomenon of "concrete" subjects, and on the need for synthesized notations. It traces these ideas briefly into the future through the work of S. R. Ranganathan, the Classification Research Group, and the second edition of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification system. It concludes that Brown's work warrants further study for the light it may shed on current classification theory and practice.

0.007209763 = product of:
  0.057678103 = sum of:
    0.057678103 = weight(_text_:work in 2359) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057678103 = score(doc=2359,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.40552467 = fieldWeight in 2359, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2359)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Survey of studies in Russia during the past 45 years concerning the work of S.R. Ranganathan, especially with regard to his classification terminology, the chain procedure and the categorial analysis for the application in the alphabetic subject index and the classified catalogue

0.0061176866 = product of:
  0.048941493 = sum of:
    0.048941493 = weight(_text_:work in 1835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048941493 = score(doc=1835,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.3440991 = fieldWeight in 1835, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1835)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

The progress in the first century of the classification era is traced in the three majot perios: pre-facet, transition-to-facet, and facet period. The facet-period is divided into the restricted facet formula, generilised facet formula periods and the two relativity periods - viz. Dorking and Elsinore periods. For each of the six resulting periods, the chief achievements in library classification and the social factors leading to them are mentioned. The achievements of the Dorking period just ending are described in greater detail. The follows the programme of research work for the Elsinore period of 1965 to 1975. A programme for fundamental research in the idea, verbal, and notational planes is chalked out. Then follows the programme for routine research in the building of schedules of common isolates, whcih is a back log from the Dorking period, and in the new area of the design and building of schedules for the depth classification of diverse subjects, needed for documentation work and service. Lastly, the organization suitable to carry out the programme is outlined

0.005250208 = product of:
  0.042001665 = sum of:
    0.042001665 = product of:
      0.08400333 = sum of:
        0.08400333 = weight(_text_:22 in 1168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08400333 = score(doc=1168,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13569894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03875087 = 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)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Source

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

0.005098072 = product of:
  0.040784575 = sum of:
    0.040784575 = weight(_text_:work in 2152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040784575 = score(doc=2152,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.28674924 = fieldWeight in 2152, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2152)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

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!

0.005098072 = product of:
  0.040784575 = sum of:
    0.040784575 = weight(_text_:work in 3945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040784575 = score(doc=3945,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.28674924 = fieldWeight in 3945, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3945)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present the initial relationship between the Classification Research Group (CRG) and the Center for Documentation and Communication Research (CDCR) and how this relationship changed between 1952 and 1970. The theory of normative behavior and its concepts of worldviews, social norms, social types, and information behavior are used to characterize the relationship between the small worlds of the two groups with the intent of understanding the gap between early classification research and information retrieval (IR) research. Design/methodology/approach This is a mixed method analysis of two groups as evidenced in published artifacts by and about their work. A thorough review of historical literature about the groups as well as their own published works was employed and an author co-citation analysis was used to characterize the conceptual similarities and differences of the two groups of researchers. Findings The CRG focused on fundamental principles to aid classification and retrieval of information. The CDCR were more inclined to develop practical methods of retrieval without benefit of good theoretical foundations. The CRG began it work under the contention that the general classification schemes at the time were inadequate for the developing IR mechanisms. The CDCR rejected the classification schemes of the times and focused on developing punch card mechanisms and processes that were generously funded by both government and corporate funding. Originality/value This paper provides a unique historical analysis of two groups of influential researchers in the field of library and information science.

0.005098072 = product of:
  0.040784575 = sum of:
    0.040784575 = weight(_text_:work in 5800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040784575 = score(doc=5800,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.28674924 = fieldWeight in 5800, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5800)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

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.

0.005046834 = product of:
  0.04037467 = sum of:
    0.04037467 = weight(_text_:work in 4940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04037467 = score(doc=4940,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.28386727 = fieldWeight in 4940, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4940)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

A detailed examination of the UDC's history, function and future prospects. Among topics discussed are: the early pioneering work of P. Otlet and H. LaFontaine; the development of Colon Classification; the 'UDC versus switching language' debate in the 1970s; the FID standard reference code project; and the recent scheme by Williamson and McIlwaine to restructure UDC completely, converting it into a Colon Classification and also creating a thesaurus drawn from the same classification. Comments that UDC, far from being a 'prehistoric monster', is becoming a sort of test laboratory for developing new and interesting documentation structures

0.005046834 = product of:
  0.04037467 = sum of:
    0.04037467 = weight(_text_:work in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04037467 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.28386727 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

The ideas and practices embraced by the term documentation introduced by Paul Otlet and his colleagues to describe the work of the International Institute of Bibliography (later FID) that they set up in Brussels in 1895, constituted a new discursive formation. The key concepts for information science were implicit in and operationalized by what was created within the International Institute of Bibliography in 1895 and the decades that followed. Important aspects of the origins of information science were contained within or became an extension of the discursive format labelled documentation

0.005046834 = product of:
  0.04037467 = sum of:
    0.04037467 = weight(_text_:work in 1594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04037467 = score(doc=1594,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.28386727 = fieldWeight in 1594, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1594)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

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.

0.005046834 = product of:
  0.04037467 = sum of:
    0.04037467 = weight(_text_:work in 3534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04037467 = score(doc=3534,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.28386727 = fieldWeight in 3534, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3534)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

The work titled Code for CIassifiers by William Stetson Merrill is examined. The development of Merrill's Code over a period of 27 years, 1912-1939 is traced by examining bibliographic, attribution, conceptual and contextual differentes. The general principles advocated, the differentes between variants, and three controversial features of the Code: 1) the distinction between classifying vs. classification, 2) borrowing of the bibliographic principle of authorial intention, and 3) use of Dewey Decimal class numbers for classified sequence of topics, are also discussed. The paper reveals the importance of the Code in its own time, the complexities of its presentation and assessment by its contemporaries, and it's status today.

0.004325858 = product of:
  0.034606863 = sum of:
    0.034606863 = weight(_text_:work in 971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034606863 = score(doc=971,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.2433148 = fieldWeight in 971, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=971)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

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

0.004325858 = product of:
  0.034606863 = sum of:
    0.034606863 = weight(_text_:work in 7646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034606863 = score(doc=7646,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.2433148 = fieldWeight in 7646, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7646)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Content

KUMAR, P.S.G.: Ranganathan through classification; LANGRIDGE, D.W.: My debt to Ranganathan; SUBBA RAO, C.V.: Controversies on Dr. S.R. Ranganathan; CHAND, K. u. G. SINGH: Impact of information technology on Ranganathan's five laws; SATIJA, M.P.: Research in librarianship before and after Ranganathan; BATTY, C.D.: The influence of Ranganathan on the structural design of index languages; DHYANI, P.: Ranganathan's normatice principles and Dewey Decimal Classification; FRIIS-HANSEN, J.: Facets and clusters; HUNTER, E.J.: Ranganathan UK: The influence of Ranganathan's work on the development of classification and indexing in the United Kingdom; McILWAINE, I.C.: Ranganathan and classification in Britain; BAKEWELL, K.G.B.: Ranganathan and library management; BHARGAVA, G,D.: Dr. S.R. Ranganathan - my teacher and mentor; NAVALINI, K.: The tallest torch bearer; COMARONI, J.P.: Ranganathan's influence on American librarianship; KONNOR, M.B.: Dr. S.R. Ranganathan - American view; SHARMA, R.N.: Ranganathan and the United States

0.004325858 = product of:
  0.034606863 = sum of:
    0.034606863 = weight(_text_:work in 1158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034606863 = score(doc=1158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.2433148 = fieldWeight in 1158, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1158)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Acknowledging the importance of classification not only for library and information science but also for the study and mapping of the world phenomena, in this paper we revisit and systematize the main types of classifications and focus on the species of classification mainly drawing on the work of S. R. Ranganathan. We trace the evolution of library classification systems by their structures and modes of design of various shades of classification systems and make a comparative study of enumerative and faceted species of library classifications. The value of this paper is to have a picture of the whole spectrum of existing classifications, which may serve for the study of future developments and constructions of new systems. This paper updates previous works by Comaromi and Ranganathan and is also theoretically inspired by them.

0.0039376556 = product of:
  0.031501245 = sum of:
    0.031501245 = product of:
      0.06300249 = sum of:
        0.06300249 = weight(_text_:22 in 3554) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06300249 = score(doc=3554,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13569894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03875087 = 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)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

25.12.1995 22:28:43

0.0036048815 = product of:
  0.028839052 = sum of:
    0.028839052 = weight(_text_:work in 3484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028839052 = score(doc=3484,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.20276234 = fieldWeight in 3484, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3484)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Experiential knowledge of government business among clerks in the Treasury's paper room stimulated new logs to control transit of records and classified indexes to expand recall of business beyond personal memory. Despite a flowering of expertise in records matters before the First World War, effective changes were compromised by the volume of paper work, inherent limitations of format, and the increased speed of business. Additional staff was the favoured option for keeping up because it did not imply re-thinking the format of records, optimum linking of their physical and intellectual control, or changed operations of the paper room and re-assignment of staff. Classified indexes, a Victorian achievement in the Treasury, held the central service together until the restrictions of format and space for files and for registration notes and for paper room operations led to a new system of registration and classification in 1920. The Victorian separation of initial registration from ultimate classification was replaced by the union of the two processes at the beginning; the principle of file formation changed from one letter, one file, to one subject, one file.