2/21/00 abstract
Hunter, E. J. (1988). Classification made simple. Aldershot: Gower.
Explains classification schemes and their use for document retrieval. Provides guidelines for creating classification schemes. Faceted classification represents a document as a set of orthogonal features (facets). Hierarchical classification represents a document by specifying its location in a hierarchy. Both systems use alphanumeric codes to shorten the representation of a document.
2/23/00 abstract
Dewey, M. (1972/1876). Catalogs and cataloging. In A. F. Painter (Ed.), Reader in classification and descriptive cataloging (p. 7-14). NCR Microcard Editions .
Introduces the Dewey Decimal System and explains its motivation. Books on similar topics are placed together to make browsing easier and to minimize problems caused by moving books. Topics are divided into a nine divisions, and each division is numbered. Each of these divisions is subdivided into nine divisions, and so on. The resultant digits are placed together to produce an identifying number for a book.
2/23/00 abstract
Pietris, M. K. (1990). Library of Congress classification. In B. G. Bengtson and J. S. Hill (Eds.), Classification of library materials: current and future potential for providing access (p. 60-80). New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers.
Discusses problems facing the Library of Congress classification scheme. Numbers may need to be changed as the world changes. Numbers may depend on previously shelved items. Tables are not standardized and can be confusing. Updated schedules are published infrequently.
2/23/00 assignment
Yahoo! Classification
The Yahoo! classification hierarchy is intended to be an index to information on the world wide web. It is obviously biased towards this purpose, as can be seen by the fact that ``Computers and Internet'' is one of the top-level categories. Like Dewey, Yahoo! separates language from literature. But, since the classification is presented in hypertext, it is simple to include cross-references, and most categories have cross-references to other places in the hierarchy.
In my search for ``classification'', I looked in the following areas:
Reference > Codes Social Science > Library And Information Science Science >
A search reveals that ``classification'' by itself is not part of the Yahoo! hierarchy. The closest we can get is:
Reference > Libraries > Professional Resources > Library Classification on the Web
So what was the point of the question? An unsuccessful search can be much more time consuming than a successful search. Abstract and technical concepts are not often in general classification hierarchies.
However, ``classification'' is such an abstract concept that it would be difficult to find in any classification hierarchy. For example, WordNet places classification here:
human action > activity > grouping > classification
``Activity'' seems a bit vague, so I doubt that I would have navigated to that term, or found ``grouping'' underneath it. Other specifications of ``activity'' include such dubious terms as ``buzz'' and ``space walk''. Wouldn't it be better to separate abstract activities from physical activities?
2/25/00 class notes
Official Lecture Notes (continued)
The spectrum of organization:
Job descriptions:
Definitions:
3/8/00 group work
We were given a set of pictures and told to come up with a classification scheme for them. We modeled the items base on how a typical L505 student would use them. The top levels of our classification scheme were home, work, and school. (I don't have a copy of the full scheme.)