Colon classification

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Colon classification (CC) is a system of library classification developed by S. R. Ranganathan. It was the first ever faceted (or analytico-synthetic) classification. The first edition was published in 1933. Since then six more editions have been published. It is especially used in libraries in India. Its name "colon classification" comes from the use of colons to separate facets in class numbers. However, many other classification schemes, some of which are completely unrelated, also use colons and other punctuation in various functions. They should not be confused with colon classification. As an example, the subject "research in the cure of tuberculosis of lungs by x-ray conducted in India in 1950" results in a call number L,45;421:6;253:f.44'N5 The components of this call number represent Medicine,Lungs;Tuberculosis:Treatment;X-ray:Research.India'1950
Contents
[hide]

1 Organization

o o

1.1 Facets 1.2 Classes

2 Example 3 See also 4 References 5 External links

Organization[edit]
The colon classification uses 42 main classes that are combined with other letters, numbers and marks in a manner resembling theLibrary of Congress Classification to sort a publication.

Library classification
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may

be challenged and removed.(March 2012)

A library classification is a system of coding, assorting and organizing documents, library materials or any information (books, serials, audiovisual materials, computer files, maps, manuscripts, realia) according to their subject and allocating a call number[clarification needed] to that information resource. Bibliographic classification systems group entities together that are relevant the same subject, typically arranged in a hierarchical tree structure (like classification systems used in biology). A different kind of classification system, called a faceted classification system, is also widely used which allows the assignment of multiple classifications to an object, enabling the classifications to be ordered in multiple ways.
Contents
[hide]

1 Description 2 Types

o o o

2.1 Universal classification systems used in the English-speaking world 2.2 Universal classification systems in other languages 2.3 Universal classification systems that rely on synthesis (faceted systems)

3 Comparing classification systems 4 See also 5 References 6 External links

Description[edit]
Library classification forms part of the field of library and information science. It is a form of bibliographic classification (library classifications are used in library catalogs, while "bibliographic classification" also covers classification used in other kinds of bibliographic databases). It goes hand in hand with library (descriptive) cataloging under the rubric of cataloging and classification, sometimes grouped together as technical services. The library professional who engages in the process of cataloging and classifying library materials is called a cataloguer or catalog librarian. Library classification systems are one of the two tools used to facilitatesubject access. The other consists of alphabetical indexing languages such as Thesauri and Subject Headings systems. Library classification of a piece of work consists of two steps. Firstly, the "aboutness" of the material is ascertained. Next, a call number (essentially a book's address) based on the classification system in use at the particular library will be assigned to the work using the notation of the system.

It is important to note that unlike subject heading or thesauri where multiple terms can be assigned to the same work, in library classification systems, each work can only be placed in one class. This is due to shelving purposes: A book can have only one physical place. However in classified catalogs one may have main entries as well as added entries. Most classification systems like the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) and Library of Congress classification also add a cutter number to each work which adds a code for the author of the work. Classification systems in libraries generally play two roles. Firstly, they facilitate subject access by allowing the user to find out what works or documents the library has on a certain subject.[1] Secondly, they provide a known location for the information source to be located (e.g. where it is shelved). Until the 19th century, most libraries had closed stacks, so the library classification only served to organize the subject catalog. In the 20th century, libraries opened their stacks to the public and started to shelve the library material itself according to some library classification to simplify subject browsing. Some classification systems are more suitable for aiding subject access, rather than for shelf location. For example, UDC which uses a complicated notation including plus, colons are more difficult to use for the purpose of shelf arrangement but are more expressive compared to DDC in terms of showing relationships between subjects. Similarly faceted classification schemes are more difficult to use for shelf arrangement, unless the user has knowledge of the citation order. Depending on the size of the library collection, some libraries might use classification systems solely for one purpose or the other. In extreme cases a public library with a small collection might just use a classification system for location of resources but might not use a complicated subject classification system. Instead all resources might just be put into a couple of wide classes (Travel, Crime, Magazines etc.). This is known as a "mark and park" classification method, more formally called reader interest classification. [2]

Types[edit]
There are many standard systems of library classification in use, and many more have been proposed over the years. However in general, classification systems can be divided into three types depending on how they are used:

Universal schemes covering all subjects. Examples include Dewey Decimal Classification, Universal Decimal Classification andLibrary of Congress Classification

Specific classification schemes for particular subjects or types of materials. Examples include Iconclass, British Catalogue of Music Classification, and Dickinson classification, or the NLM Classification for medicine.

National schemes specially created for certain countries. An example is the Swedish library classification system, SAB (Sveriges Allmnna Biblioteksfrening).

In terms of functionality, classification systems are often described as:

enumerative: subject headings are listed alphabetically, with numbers assigned to each heading in alphabetical order.

hierarchical: subjects are divided hierarchically, from most general to most specific. faceted or analytico-synthetic: subjects are divided into mutually exclusive orthogonal facets.

There are few completely enumerative systems or faceted systems; most systems are a blend but favouring one type or the other. The most common classification systems, LCC and DDC, are essentially enumerative, though with some hierarchical and faceted elements (more so for DDC), especially at the broadest and most general level. The first true faceted system was the Colon classification of S. R. Ranganathan.

Universal c

Margaret Kipp - kipp@uwm.edu - https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/kipp/public/courses/511/

511: Organization of Information Categorisation and Classification

Categories and Categorisation

The classical view of categorisation states that categories are based on shared properties. For example: birds fly. This view leads to lists of exceptions such as penguins and ostriches which are considered birds but do not fly.

Categorisation is a basic method used by all humans to organise thoughts, action, speech and perception. It is a process that allows people to make useful assumptions about new things by allowing them to make comparisons with well known things. Categorisation can be thought of as the process of thinking of something as a kind of thing, similar to something else.

Separating items into kinds of things is categorisation. Categorisation tends to be automatic. For example, when entering this room you automatically categorised objects into furniture, computer equipment, etc. Categories can be based on concrete entities like chairs, tables, cars, birds or on abstract entities like emotions, social relationships, events, scientific and cultural entities.

Classical categorisation theory assumed that entities fit well into one category and were not ambiguous. This has proven to be somewhat optimistic.

Eleanor Rosch, a psychologist, pointed out two flaws in classical theory. First, if classical categorisation theory is correct then categories should not have objects that are exceptional. Second, categories should be defined only by properties inherent to the object. Neither of these assumptions is true, thus poking holes in the traditional theory of classification.

Prototype theory, developed by Rosch, states that there are prototypes or best examples of each category. For example, if bird is a category covering feathered beings with wings which fly, then a robin or a crow would be better examples of a bird than a penguin or ostrich (which have wings but do not fly). Prototype theory supports the idea that our knowledge of the world is heavily determined by how we categorise since it affects what questions people will ask and how they will answer them. It supports the notion that there are different ways to see the world and also supports a disconnect between meaning and truth.

The important aspects of categorisation theory that affect subject analysis can be summarised as follows:

some categories are fuzzy, that is they have graded degrees of membership from boundary members to central members (e.g. tall man, red) other categories have clear boundaries, but members may be more or less typical examples of the categories (e.g. birds) relationships between categories are more complex than a hierarchy, some categories are simply more basic to the human mind basic level categories depend on human perception of part-whole relationships and knowledge of how the parts function with respect to the whole categories are affected by culture and biology as well as the external world, thus prototypes are culturally determined properties relevant to the description of categories are those which we can see and interact with

Prototype theory affects subject analysis since it reminds us that categories and subjects used by one group of people may not be the same as those used by another group. A simple example is the difference between medical terminology and ordinary terminology; the term stomach flu is inaccurate since it is not actually related to the influenza virus.

Two other important concepts in categorisation are boundary objects and miscellaneous objects. Boundary objects are objects which fall on the boundary between two or more categories. These items could be classified in either group with equal ease. Boundary objects remind us that categories are not necessarily mutually exclusive, though many classification systems attempt to work towards the goal of being able to place each item into one and only one category. Miscellaneous objects are similar, but instead of fitting into multiple categories they appear to fit into non of the existing categories.

Shera and Egan's principles

In the last few weeks we looked at various ways of expressing the subject of an information package ranging from brief summarisations to abstracts, indexing systems (controlled vocabulary subject heading lists and thesauri) and social tagging.

Shera and Egan's Eight principles for indexing systems are a set of goals for indexing and classification systems designed to make them more flexible and more able to support retrieval.

1. Provide access by subject to all relevant material. 2. Provide subject access to materials through all suitable principles of subject 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
organization, e.g., matter, process, applications, etc. Bring together references to materials [that] treat substantially the same subject regardless of disparities in terminology. (e.g. Trucks vs. Lorries) Show affiliations among subject fields. Provide entry to any subject field at any level of analysis, from the most general to the most specific. Provide entry through any vocabulary common to any considerable group of users. (e.g. Movies, Films, Motion pictures) Provide a formal description of the subject content of bibliographic unit. Coextensivity means that indexing must equal subject, no more no less. Provide means for the user to make selection from among all items in any particular category.

Principles 6 and 7 suffer when language is used for subject indexing. Principle 6 requires that all possible terms be available, but controlled vocabularies force the choice of a preferred term and often fail to provide adequate entry vocabulary to allow users to reach the preferred term. Principle 7 requires that an item be described as fully and briefly as possible, but from the summarisation exercise in assignment 4, we can see this is also difficult, if not impossible to do in a brief statement without leaving out key concepts from description in discipline-topic-form format. Instead, controlled vocabularies or natural language keywords tend to focus on topics and leave locating the discipline or form as an exercise for the user of the system.

Classification, since it does not use natural language, can be used to fulfill principle 7, though a complex classification may require training to use and thus fail to fully support principle 6.

Classification

Classification is the use of symbolic notation to achieve the objectives of subject indexing. Subject indexing and classification attempt to achieve the same result, a full description of the subject of the item, but classification systems use letters, numbers and symbols to represent subjects, thus removing natural language from the equation. Otherwise, they are very similar types of systems which rely on the categorisation of subjects (subject analysis and separation into categories) and their expression used predefined standards (for subject indexing these are standards for the selection and formatting of controlled vocabulary terms).

One major advantage of classification systems over indexing systems is that the numbers used in classification systems can be language independent. An item with the symbol 973 (Dewey Decimal symbol for History of the United States) it identifies this concept regardless of the language. A version of Dewey translated into Spanish would still have 973 as the category for US History, though it would be called Historia de Estados Unidos in Spanish. Additionally, it is immediately obvious to a user familiar with the classification when seeing the 9 in 973 that this item must be somehow related to the field of history or geography since the 900s are History & Geography. This is a syndetic structure just like that of a thesaurus.

900 History & Geography 910 Geography & travel 920 Biography & genealogy 930 History of ancient world (to ca. 499) 940 History of Europe 950 History of Asia 960 History of Africa 970 History of North America 971 Canada 972 Middle America; Mexico 973 United States 974 Northeastern United States

975 Southeastern United States 976 South central United States 977 North central United States 978 Western United States 979 Great Basin & Pacific Slope region 980 History of South America 990 History of other areas An excerpt from the DDC Summaries for DDC22 (http://www.oclc.org/dewey/resources/summaries/deweysummaries.pdf)

In this excerpt from the Dewey Decimal Classification, we can see multiple categories under 900 for geography, biography and the history of various parts of the world. The entire context of the topic is available both up and down the classification. It is worth noting that this excerpt only shows part of the pattern. Numbers exist between each of the listed numbers and can be extended beyond the three number classification numbers listed.

Classification thus allows items to be placed in context with less need to consult a book of subject headings for an exact discipline. Dewey itself has only 10 upper level categories. So, classification comes closer to resolving Shera and Egan's 8 principles since it brings together like material into useful clusters, is free of the limitations of natural language and preserves more of the context of the subject.

The purpose of using classification is to bring related resources together in a helpful sequence from the general to the specific. This is very similar to the principle behind indexing, which is to cluster materials with like materials.

In Class Exercise: Context in Classification

In Dewey, biographies can be placed under 900s (geography, history or biography) or under related subjects (e.g. scientists or mathematicians under the 500s for sciences). In a small group discuss the pros and cons of placing biographies in their own group or under a specific subject. What do you think libraries should do? You might also consider what decisions you have seen in libraries or bookstores.

History of Classification

Bibliographic classifications were created for the purpose of arranging (organising and clustering) and retrieving information, at the time mainly books, and were later used to arrange and retrieve the surrogates in catalogues. Early catalogues were generally arranged by author, title or accession number, accessible via a book catalogue. A library of a few hundred books can be searched reasonably quickly by someone with some knowledge of the collection so classifications were less important. Many people have personal libraries that vastly exceed the size of the average monastic library in the middle ages.

Major work in the development of classification system began in the 16th century when librarians began to experiment with classifications systems, mostly based on philosophical separations of all of knowledge into categories. This type of system is known as a universal classification.

In the middle ages, books tended to be organised based on the school curriculum at the time (the trivium of grammar, rhetoric and logic and the quadrivium of arithmetic, music, geometry and astronomy). The baconian classification of knowledge (by Francis Bacon, a 17th century philosopher) divided knowledge into 3 faculties: history (natural, civil, literary, ecclesiastical), philosophy (including theology) and works of imagination (poetry, fables, etc). You can still see the influence of his philosophies in modern classification systems.

A more modern version of this type of universal classification is that used by the Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedias are systems for the organisation of knowledge. (Wikipedia does this too to some extent.) In an encyclopaedia, the editors decide what is worth including and how to organise it.

Britannica includes a book called the Propaedia, which is a preliminary volume in classified order intended to serve as a sort of browsers index to the entire encyclopedia. This preliminary volume is known as the "outline of knowledge." The classification in the 15th edition (the current edition) is based on the following order:

1. Matter and energy 2. Earth 3. Life on earth 4. Human life 5. Human society 6. Art 7. Technology 8. Religion 9. The history of "mankind" 10. The branches of knowledge [From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prop%C3%A6dia]

This list really does not appear that similar to the classifications we use in libraries, but it does show a definite philosophy about knowledge. The propaedia considers that everything that exists is either matter or energy (starts with the sciences in other words), that the most important part to us is the Earth, followed by life on earth, human life, human society, art, technology and religion, history and finally scholarship.

Like library classifications, each of these categories is subdivided into 2-7 parts, which are themselves divided into sections.

Part 6: Art Division 1: Art in General 611 Theory and Classification of the Arts 612 Experience and Criticism of Works of Art; the Nonaesthetic Context of Art 613 Characteristics of the Arts in Popular Cultures Division 2: The Particular Arts 621 Literature 622 Theatre 623 Motion Pictures 624 Music 625 Dance 626 Architecture, Garden and Landscape Design, and Urban Design 627 Sculpture 628 Drawing, Painting, Printmaking, and Photography 629 Arts of Decoration and Functional Design [Excerpt from the Propaedia, Britannica 15th ed.]

Library classifications began to be created in the late 1800s and early 1900s to handle the early stages of the print revolution. This was a time of great change in scholarship as the sciences became increasingly important and also the beginnings of the information revolution as an explosion in literacy rates caused a corresponding explosion in the printing of materials. This information explosion caused an increasing worry about the ability to organise information, and thus in this time period a number of universal bibliographic classifications were created to solve the problem (or attempt anyway). Classifications such as the Dewey Decimal System, Library of Congress Classification, the Universal Decimal System and the Bliss Classification all date from this period.

In most North American libraries, classification systems are used as call numbers to arrange resources on the shelves in useful clusters. This creates collocation of items by subject which facilitates browsing and the serendipitous location of material that is similar to the material the user located in the catalogue. The limitation to this system, though, is that a print item can only be located in one place in the library, and thus is given only one classification number, so this does not really solve the problem of assigning enough subjects to an item to fully cover the aboutness. Thus, subject headings are used as a supplement to enhance the ability to browse and locate items which may be related, but physically separate on the shelves of the library.

Open stack libraries are less common in other parts of the world. With closed stacks, many libraries simply use a fixed location to store books, this fixed location may be an accession number assigned when the book arrived (each item would be shelved next to the next newest item). This system is also generally used in large national libraries and specialised libraries. Users would then locate the item in the catalogue and provide the library staff with a list of location identifiers or call numbers they require. In this context, classification systems are often used in a multilingual context instead of subject headings to provide language-free methods of browsing a subject area. This allows users to search in their language using a system which provides the classification number associated with their desired concept.

Classification is the primary tool of the domain of study known as knowledge organization. Many principles of classification have carried over into other fields of study examining knowledge and information organisation such as artificial intelligence, where scientists attempt to create machines which can think in the human sense, by provided categories into which the machine can organise the world. This is the sense in which the term ontology was created. The basic principle involved is that of membership or non membership in a category. The machine is asked whether an item "is a" member or not. Thus, the rule or heuristic is referred to as an "is a" rule. This term is also used in the construction of thesauri

Properties of Classifications

There are four basic properties of good classifications: inclusivity, systematicity, flexibility and expandibility.

Classifications should be inclusive as well was comprehensive. This means that a given classification must include all possible entities within its field of coverage. For a universal classification, this means all fields of recorded knowledge. For a classification of household furniture, this would include sofas, kitchen chairs, bookcases and even computer tables. Obviously, this classification would have some overlap with office furniture and other categories. A classification should encompass all collectible resources within its designated field of interest. Like controlled vocabularies, classifications are supposed to use terminology that is clear and descriptive with a consistent meaning for both the user and the cataloguer. This means that terminology should be that used by the group which will use and apply the classification. Though this terminology is not used in the classification symbols, it is used to search for a given class number and to select a number to apply.

Classifications must be systematic, which means that the rules for the inclusion and exclusion of items must be clear, relatively unambiguous and based on clearly describable principles.

Classifications are also supposed to be flexible and expansible. Both of these properties imply that the classification will be able to manage new knowledge by allocating space and incorporating new rules for its classification. Classification systems that are difficult to expand are considered somewhat brittle. Like controlled vocabularies, classifications change with cultural viewpoints and the creation of new knowledge, thus they are constantly being updated.

Types of Classifications

The major classification systems used in libraries fall into four basic classes, which are not mutually exclusive. Many popular classification systems show elements of more than one of these types of classifications.

Enumerative classifications attempt to provide a designation for all single and composite subjects covered by the system. This is the principle of inclusivity. Every concept that needs to be represented in the classification must have a location in the classification. This principle is also related to the concept of literary warrant. Literary warrant implies that the system is based on the contents of a physical collection. For

example, the Library of Congress Classification (LCC) uses the collection of the Library of Congress as its literary warrant. So, for every item in the Library of Congress collection, there must be a corresponding classification in the LCC. The DDC currently has a literary warrant consisting of the collections listed in the OCLC bibliographic database.

Hierarchical classifications are arranged according to the principles of general-specific relations. That is to say that each item is arranged so that items above it are more general and items below are more specific. For example, Animal - Cat - Manx Cat, is a very simple hierarchy showing the transition from the more general term Animal to the more specific term Manx Cat.

Using the bank example from week 7, we can see a distinct hierarchy of items in the tree view.

This is a hierarchy with a general term at the top (Banks) and much more specific terms at the bottom (Home equity). To turn this into a classification, requires only the addition of numbers (or some other symbol) attached to each concept.

1 Banks 1.1 Deposits 1.2 Investments 1.3 Loans

1.3.1 Business 1.3.2 Personal 1.3.3 Mortgage 1.3.3.1 Purchase 1.3.3.2 Vacation residence 1.3.3.3 Home equity

This forms a classification, with a very basic hierarchical format. This format of a classification is known as a schedule. A list of all upper level categories is generally known as an outline or summary.

Hierarchical classifications attempt to follow the natural organisation of a subject into divisions and subdivisions, following the logic of the field. This implies that changes to a field of knowledge can have a substantial impact on the classification itself.

Synthetic classifications allow for a greater flexibility in the creation of multi concept subjects as different parts of a classification may be used together to express complex subjects. Synthetic classifications assign designations to simple concepts and provide lists of rules for the combination of these designations into composite subjects. For example, if the Bank classification was more extensive and included a class number for Townhouse (e.g. 06 Townhouse) a synthetic classification could put the concepts Townhouse and Mortgage together to form the concept "Mortgage for a townhouse. With 06 for townhouse and 1.3.3 for mortgage, the final classification number could be 1.3.3-06. The Dewey Decimal System is synthetic.

Faceted classifications allow the combination of several different classification schemes in a prescribed sequence, in order to express clearly defined, mutually exclusive, and collectively exhaustive properties, or characteristics of a subject. That is a faceted classification consists of facets, which may be properties or characteristics of a subject or of its format, that can be combined together to form a full and complete description. The most famous faceted classification is Ranganathan's Colon Classification, but elements of faceted classification have been included in DDC and facets are commonly

used by information architects building taxonomies on corporate and government websites.

An example of a faceted classification would be an online clothing store allowing users to browse items by: style, colour, type of clothing, fabric, size, fit, care instructions, price, etc. Each of these facets is separate from the other since an item normally comes in multiple sizes, fits, colours and may even have different associated prices or fabrics.

Classification Concepts

The major bibliographic classification schemes have certain commonalities. Each system provides a verbal description of important concepts that can be represented with the scheme. Each system also provides a meaningful arrangement of concepts in a classified (hierarchical) or logical order to permit users to locate concepts. The concepts are all associated with a notation used to represent these concepts and laid out in a schedule (hierarchical listing) of classification numbers and in supplementary tables. This notation does not rely on natural language but on symbols (e.g. letter or numbers) and punctuation or formatting to combine them.

Since concepts may fall into multiple disciplines or cross disciplines, each system also has references within the schedules and tables intended to guide classifiers and searchers to related topics or different aspects of the topic. These references are like related term references in a thesaurus. In addition to these references, classification systems provide indexes to the terms used in the classification as well as synonyms of those terms to lead searchers to the proper notation.

Finally, classifications provide instruction manuals detailing how to use and apply the classification in the organisation of knowledge. Each of the major bibliographic classification systems is kept updated by an organisation dedicated to the maintenance and revision of the classification.

Beyond the basic properties of classifications, there are a number of issues which affect classifications. Some of these issues apply to all classification schemes regardless of their intended uses, while others have a greater effect on classification systems that are used to create call numbers.

Classifications can be broad or close. A broad classification uses only the main classes and divisions of a classification scheme and perhaps a few subdivisions. OCLC publishes an abridged version of the Dewey classification that rarely goes beyond 4 or 5 numbers for use in small libraries with collections of less than 20000 items. This would be a broad classification. A close classification, in contrast, uses all available subdivisions to generate extremely specific subjects. This issue is to some extent independent of the classification itself and is simply a matter of deciding between the equivalent of summarisation and depth indexing in the realm of classification.

Broad versus close classification is an issue in union catalogues as collections which have been classified at different levels of classification are combined. Systems are generally not designed to handle multiple levels of classification and the combination of broad and close classification breaks the principles of collocation as items classified at a broad level do not collocate properly with items classified more closely. This is more of an issue for institutions that use classification for call numbers as a small library may be reluctant to assign long, potentially confusing call numbers to its materials, but may find it useful to copy catalogue using a large bibliographic database like OCLC.

Classifications may be based on the equivalent of user or literary warrant. In classification, this is a distinction between attempting to classify all knowledge versus classifying the material in a collection. DDC was designed to classify all knowledge, but later revisions have been based on literary warrant using the resources of OCLCs bibliographic database as the collection. The Library of Congress Classification, like the LCSH, was based on literary warrant, in other words the collection available in the Library of Congress. Dewey divides knowledge into 10 basic categories classed from 0 to 9 which are then subdivided by tens and hundreds creating 1000 divisions. LCC by contrast uses the letters of the alphabet for upper level categories. Recent revisions have created subdivisions with up to 3 letters, allowing for a larger number of divisions. Ultimately, the question is whether a scheme should be based on a philosophical view of the universe of knowledge or on the practical view of what is actually being studied or created at the time of creation of the classification.

Another issue in classification is that of maintaining the integrity of the classification numbers versus keeping pace with knowledge. While the notion of maintaining the integrity of numbers in a classification is certainly a reasonable one, since it would facilitate user searching by allowing users to simply remember the number for the topic that interests them, it is not practical since knowledge grows at different rates and it is not actually possible to predict which areas will be most popular in the future. So, all classification schemes require periodic updating in order to keep pace with knowledge.

LCC has a greater scope for flexibility with a larger number of upper level classes and so is more flexible in this way. DDC has proven less flexible, and there have been changes to divisions although the upper level classes have remained constant. Changes to lower level divisions are much less expensive than changes to upper level divisions since changes to upper level divisions affect far more items.

When classification numbers are used as call numbers, this also entails changes to the call numbers themselves and the rearrangement of the physical material.

An example of the types of changes that have occurred can be seen in the mathematics section of Dewey.

DDC 1st ed.

510 Mathematics 511 Arithmetic 512 Algebra 513 Geometry 514 Trigonometry 515 Conic Sections 516 Analytical Geometry

517 Calculus 518 Quaternions 519 Probabilities

DDC 22nd ed.

510 Mathematics 511 General principles of mathematics 512 Algebra 513 Arithmetic 514 Topology 515 Analysis 516 Geometry 517 [Unassigned] 518 Numerical Analysis [formerly 515] 519 Probabilities and applied mathematics

The section on Arithmetic has been moved from 511 to 513, a number of sections have disappeared entirely (Conic Sections, Quaternions) and some sections have been renamed (Probabilities) or combined (Geometry and Analytical Geometry). The original order reflects the organisation of mathematics as it was seen in 1876, while the newer order reflects a more modern view of the field some 130 years later.

This leads directly into the issue of fixed versus relative locations in a library and of location versus collocation. A library using fixed locations would be less affected by changes to classification systems as the physical location of the items on the shelves would not change. Only the classification numbers would change. This still poses a

problem in terms of updates, but this could be alleviated with the use of a bibliographic utility to help locate and identify changed numbers. Libraries using classification for call numbers would have to decide how to handle the change. Materials could simply be left as they are, but then material from Arithmetic might be located under 511 from the old scheme or 513 from the new and be hopelessly jumbled with Geometry (513 from the old scheme) and general principles (511 in the new scheme). This does nothing for collocation.

Location versus collocation is a related issue that, like the issue of fixed versus relative locations, is often related to whether the library has open or closed stacks. Most libraries with closed stacks make little attempt to collocate items instead providing collocation via the catalogue and using a simple location code (usually an accession number) for location. This, however, limits the user's ability to browse the collection and make serendipitous discoveries in clusters of like materials that are created by a collocation system.

Finally, classifications tend to appear in various different broad classes: universal, national, subject specific, and homegrown systems. Universal classifications attempt to cover all of knowledge, while subject specific classifications cover all of knowledge only within a specific subject area and in much more depth. National classification systems cover the fields of knowledge that are relevant to a particular country. Homegrown systems include small subject area classifications developed for highly specialised collections, but also include classifications like that used by Yahoo in its Yahoo! Local directory (http://local.yahoo.com/).

This classification has multiple upper level categories which are subdivided into lower level categories. The upper level categories are: Automotive, Community, Computers and Internet, Education and Instruction, Entertainment and Arts, Food and Dining, Health and Medicine, Home and Garden, Legal and Financial, Other Professional Services, Personal Care, Real Estate, Recreation and Sports, Retail Shopping, Travel and Transportation, and Business to Business. This is an example of literary warrant on the web, reflecting the material that Yahoo has assembled and organised for its users.

Universal Classifications

The Propaedia from the Encyclopaedia Britannica is an example of a universal classification. Most library classifications are universal classifications intended to organise all of knowledge. Examples of universal classification systems include: Dewey Decimal System (DDC), Library of Congress Classification (LCC), Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), Bliss' Bibliographic Classification (Bliss) and Ranganathan's Colon Classification (Colon). In contrast to universal classifications, subject specific classifications offer specific classification systems for specific subject, usually at a much greater level of detail than would ever be available in a universal classification.

Most library classifications divide knowledge into a series of main classes. DDC uses 10 main classes, LCC uses 21, UDC uses 10, Bliss has 27 and the Colon Classification uses 42 major classes.

The most commonly used classifications in the United States and Canada are DDC and LCC. UDC is most commonly used in Europe and Bliss is mainly used in the UK. The Colon classification is mostly used in India. These last there classifications have gained a certain amount of attention with the increasing number of resources available electronically since UDC, Bliss and Colon are all faceted classifications that lend themselves to Internet classification and searching. While Dewey has some faceted aspects, it is still an enumerative classification.

DDC and LCC have many commonalities. Both systems were created in the United States at around the same time period. Both systems are enumerative, that is they attempt to provide a unique number for all major concepts or topics, where a faceted system (which is generally not enumerative) would build a number based on the component subjects in the item. The two systems are also updated continuously to keep pace with the development of knowledge. Both systems also provide additional tables to add information about the geographic location, historical time period, format of the item or main entry to the classification number, regardless of topic.

Despite these similarities, there are also major differences between the two systems. LCC is larger than DDC and has a greater range of numbers. DDC, however, has a basic structural principle that runs throughout the classification while each main class of LCC is actually developed independently of all the others and thus is organised in a completely different manner based on the disciplines included. This means that while knowledge of one DDC class may help in navigating others, this same knowledge in LCC does not carry over to other classes.

More obviously, DDC and LCC use very different notations for class numbers. DDC is almost exclusively a numeric system with a decimal point placed after the third number in all cases (pure notation) while LCC uses letters for upper level classes and a mix of numbers and letters for qualifiers (mixed notation). LCC allows numbers to be modified by adding Cutter numbers to identify the main entry. LCC cannot easily be abridge, but DDC can be abridged by simply shortening the number. The item will still fall into the same upper level divisions.

Both DDC and LCC uses auxiliary tables to add information about geographic places, historical time periods or format, but while DDC has one set of tables for this task, LCC has different tables for each main class. This leads to the final difference between the two, which is the use of mnemonics or repeating groups of numbers. In DDC, groups of numbers which represent the same topic can be found in various places in the schedules.

We are going to examine the most commonly used universal bibliographic classifications in a bit more detail.

Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC)

Melvil Dewey published the Decimal Classification in 1876. It has had a transformative effect on classification, librarianship and the creation of ontologies globally as many decimal classification systems were based on Dewey's or developed to try to counteract perceived problems with DDC. Dewey is also famous in library history as the founder of the first professional school for librarians and a strong proponent of public libraries as a portal to lifelong learning and increased literacy. So, DDC was intended to teach users something about the structure of knowledge as they browsed the library.

Outline of Knowledge

DDC is based on the ontology or order of knowledge developed by Francis Bacon in the 17th century. Dewey, however had his own ideas about how things should be organised and somewhat ignored Bacon's three upper level divisions.

The first ten classes in Dewey's Decimal Classification are as follows: 0 Generalities 1 Philosophy & psychology 2 Religion 3 Social sciences 4 Language 5 Natural sciences & mathematics 6 Applied sciences (now called Technology) 7 The arts 8 Literature and rhetoric 9 Geography and history [Excerpt from Decimal Classification by Melville Dewey, 1876]

The first ten classes in DDC22: 000 Computer science, information & general works 100 Philosophy & psychology 200 Religion 300 Social sciences 400 Language 500 Science 600 Technology 700 Arts & recreation

800 Literature 900 History & geography [Excerpt from DDC22 http://www.oclc.org/dewey/resources/summaries/deweysummaries.pdf]

These classes have not changed substantially since that time, but there have been many changes to lower level classes and entire areas have been reorganised as the branches of knowledge changed or became more or less important.

Examining Dewey's classes, you can see that this is a completely different classification from that used in the Propaedia from Britannica. Philosophically, the Britannica begins with the sciences and moves from there to the Earth and life. Dewey's list begins with philosophy and religion before moving on to life, technology and then the Earth and history. Each of these orders imposes a set of presumptions and preconceptions on users about the relationship between life and reality.

Basic Principles Underlying DDC

The Dewey Decimal System is based on a number of underlying principles: Hierarchical, Enumerative, Literary Warrant, Decimal Division, Classification by Discipline, Synthetic and Mnemonic.

The Dewey Decimal Classification is enumerative, hierarchical and decimal, and includes faceting. It is decimal because it divides all of knowledge into 10 classes (from 0 to 9) and uses an almost purely numeric notation for its classification symbols. Each of the ten classes is subdivided and so on.

Decimal Division

All Dewey numbers are based on this decimal principle of division or subdivision. There are three summaries of DDC numbers: the 10s, the 100s and the 1000s. The 10s are

the main classes. The 100s are subdivisions of these classes, and each of the 100 divisions is subdivided into 10 subdivisions creating 1000 classes.

For example, the number 973 is History of the United States. The 900 in 973 represents History. The 70 in 973 represents North America and the 3 in 973 represents the United States. All Dewey numbers can be broken apart like this to discover the major topics or divisions.

Classification by Discipline

Dewey is discipline based not topic based. To find subjects, you must enter through the context of the associated discipline. Cooking, for example, is listed under home economics. This leads the side effect that some topics are distributed throughout the classification as they are relevant to multiple disciplines (sometimes referred to as a distributed relative).

An example of this is the topic alcohol, which is relevant to a number of disciplines. It can be:

A social problem: 300 Social sciences 360 Social problems & social services 361-365 Social problems and services 362-363 Specific social problems and services 362 Social welfare problems and services 362.1-362.4 Problems of and services to persons with illnesses and disabilities 362.2 Mental and emotional illnesses and disturbances 362.25-362.29 Specific problems

362.29 Substance abuse 362.292 *Alcohol

A chemical compound: 500 Science 540 Chemistry 541-547 Chemistry 547 Organic chemistry 547.01-547.08 Kinds of compounds identified by component elements 547.03 *Oxy and hydroxy compounds 547.031 *Alcohols

A health problem: 600 Technology 610 Medicine & health 618 Other branches of medicine Gynecology and obstetrics 618.1-618.8 Gynecology and obstetrics 618.3-618.8 Diseases, disorders, management of pregnancy, childbirth, puerperium 618.3 *Diseases and complications of pregnancy 618.32 *Fetal disorders 618.326 Diseases of specific systems and organs 618.3268 *Diseases of nervous system 618.32686 *Substance-related disorders

618.326861 *Alcohol-related disorders

A detergent: 600 Technology 660 Chemical engineering 668 Technology of other organic products 668.1 Surface-active agents (Surfactants) 668.14 Detergents and wetting agents

Something to drink: 600 Technology 640 Home & family management 641 Food and drink 641.8 Cooking specific kinds of dishes and preparing beverages 641.87 Preparing beverages 641.874 Alcoholic beverages

To resolve this problem, Dewey has a relative index. The relative index provides access for concepts that are treated in multiple places, allowing the user to select which aspect of the topic interests them.

The relative index entry for alcohol looks like this: 1. 362.292 *Alcohol 2. 547.031 *Alcohols

3. 618.326861 *Alcohol-related disorders 4. 668.14 Detergents and wetting agents

And the entry for alcoholic looks like this: 1. 178.1 Consumption of alcoholic beverages 2. B 205.681 Alcoholic beverages--ethics--religion 3. B 241.681 Alcoholic beverages--ethics--religion--Christianity 4. B 296.3681 Alcoholic beverages--ethics--religion--Judaism 5. B 297.5681 Alcoholic beverages--ethics--religion--Islam 6. B 306.87420874 Alcoholic fathers 7. B 344.0541 Alcoholic beverages--public control--law, . . . 8. 353.37 *Regulating personal conduct 9. 363.1929 Specific foods 10. 363.41 Sale of alcoholic beverages

Synthetic

DDC is synthetic, which means it is possible to add numbers together, although only when the schedules tell you that you may.

For instance, to assign numbers under "Public Administration--Financial Administration and Budgets--Budgeting"

Search the relative index for Budgeting, the resulting number is 325.48

In the notes, you are directed to "Add as instructed under 352-354" where you find several options.

The first few starting with 01-09 are all standard subdivisions from Table 1

Check for other options first, since the standard subdivisions can always be added at the end.

Another option is: 27-28 Administration of supporting and controlling functions of government: Add to 2 the numbers following 352 in 352.7-352.8 , e.g., promoting and disseminating knowledge 274, regulation 28 (note: 27 is the 2.7 from 352.7)

If you are dealing with regulation of financial administration, you must begin with 352.48 for "Budgeting" and then add (append) whatever is found following the 2 at 352.7-352.8

For example 352.83 is "setting standards" this gives us an 83 to add to budgeting

Now we add (by appending, not arithmetically): 352.48 + 83 = 352.4883 for "Setting standards for Regulating Public Budgets."

DDC also uses tables of standard subdivisions to add geographic, historical or format information to a classification number. These tables are standard and used for all DDC numbers, regardless of main class. Table 1 refers to format, Table 2 refers to geographic places or historical time periods. There are other tables, but tables 1 and 2 are the most common.

From Table 1, 016 means bibliography, 05 means periodical, 03 means encyclopedia, 09 means historic or geographic treatment, etc. If we had a bibliography of books about setting standards for public budgets it would be classed as 352.4883016.

Broad and Close Classification

DDC allows for extremely close classification, which would be extremely useful in a large library, but the number above for setting standards for public budgets would be less useful in a small library with only one or two books on public administration. In such a library, the number could be abbreviated to 352 using Abridged Dewey notation. The decision would not only be based on the length of the number, but also on its effect on collocation. By using simpler numbers in smaller collections you gather more materials together in larger groups, allowing your users a greater selection. By using complex numbers in a research collection you separate the components of complex topics as an aid to selection for the scholar.

Mnemonic

DDC is also mnemonic, which means that the schedules have built in memory devices to help decipher the subjects behind the numbers. This means that basic numbers always have the same meaning so you can recognise them whenever they appear. 05 is always a periodical (050 is in fact the number for serials). Another example is 973 which refers to items about the History of the United States. The notation 973 can be found in other locations as well indicating that an item has something to do with the United States. For example, 782.4216615920973 would be a History of Rock Protest Songs from the United States.

DDC and OCLC

DDC is maintained by OCLC, the world's largest bibliographic utility. The classification itself has been translated into at least 30 languages and is used all over the world in both small and large libraries.

A summary of the upper level classifications is available from their website (http://www.oclc.org/dewey/resources/summaries/). Webdewey (http://connexion.oclc.org/) allows electronic access to the DDC schedules and tables, but the schedules are also available in print.

Library of Congress Classification (LCC)

In 1897, the Library of Congress decided to devise a new classification for its materials due to a move into a new building. The new classification would cover the entire collection, thus allowing for a unified catalogue, which had not previously existed. While the classification would be unified, it would also allow subject specialists to generate appropriate categories for their literatures. The LC examined DDC and a classification created by Charles Cutter (Cutter's Expansive Classification) but rejected both of them.

Outline of Knowledge

Like Dewey, Cutter developed a universal classification. Unlike Dewey, Cutter based his classification on an evolutionary approach to knowledge. At the time the Library of Congress needed to make a decision about a new classification Dewey and Cutter were the latest and most sophisticated developments. In the end LC chose neither. The main reason DDC was rejected was Dewey's own inflexibility--he would not make changes that would disrupt the 100 libraries who were already using it. Cutter's outline of classes was accepted, but it was then reworked by James Hanson, Head of Cataloguing and Charles Martel, Chief Classifier. The only change they made was to place the arts between the social sciences and the sciences (Cutter had placed them at the end). As with Dewey, the resulting main classes are still in use.

The final arrangement uses the letters of the alphabet to identify classes, and uses cardinal numerals to identify divisions and subdivisions within the classes. In some instances, two and even three letter combinations are used to identify major divisions.

Here is the outline for LCC: A -- GENERAL WORKS B -- PHILOSOPHY. PSYCHOLOGY. RELIGION C -- AUXILIARY SCIENCES OF HISTORY

D -- WORLD HISTORY AND HISTORY OF EUROPE, ASIA, AFRICA, AUSTRALIA, NEW ZEALAND, ETC. E -- HISTORY OF THE AMERICAS F -- HISTORY OF THE AMERICAS G -- GEOGRAPHY. ANTHROPOLOGY. RECREATION H -- SOCIAL SCIENCES J -- POLITICAL SCIENCE K -- LAW L -- EDUCATION M -- MUSIC AND BOOKS ON MUSIC N -- FINE ARTS P -- LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE Q -- SCIENCE R -- MEDICINE S -- AGRICULTURE T -- TECHNOLOGY U -- MILITARY SCIENCE V -- NAVAL SCIENCE Z -- BIBLIOGRAPHY. LIBRARY SCIENCE. INFORMATION RESOURCES (GENERAL) [Excerpt from the LCC Outline http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/lcco/]

Basic Principles Underlying LCC

The Library of Congress Classification System is based on a number of underlying principles: Enumerative, Literary Warrant, Geographical Arrangement, Alphabetical Arrangement, Economy of Notation and Close Classification.

Enumeration

LCC is enumerative, which means like DDC it contains every concept required to classify the books it covers, in this case those at the Library of Congress.

You can see the evolutionary notion of knowledge in the progress of classes. From chaos comes reason (philosophy) and God (religion), then society (history, social sciences, law, education) gives way to the finer things (music and literature), all of which is explained by the sciences, and is defended by the military, and is indexed by the library. Notice how much more complex this schedule is than the simple ten classes of theDDC. Each letter represents a discipline, and has its own schedule.

Classification by Discipline

The schedules in LCC were all developed by subject specialists consulting published bibliographies, histories and their own collections. Specialists worked on subclasses independently with an editor in charge of each schedule and Martel in charge of the whole thing. The classification is run in the same manner today--LCC's specialists tend to the different divisions as they evolve, with a central office in charge of the entire classification. The schedules are disciplinary, just like DDC. There is no index, although the Library of Congress Subject Headings can function as an index.

Each schedule has a similar format. 1) Prefatory note with history and scope 2) Synopsis (all main divisions) 3) Outline (all main subdivisions) 4) Schedules

5) Auxiliary tables 6) Index 7) Supplementary additions and changes

For each discipline a set of formal divisions is applied called Martel's Seven Points. These points dictate the general pattern of arrangement of each division within a class. Although it is not always followed precisely the progression is this:

1) General form divisions: Periodicals, Societies, Collections, Dictionaries, etc. 2) Theory, Philosophy 3) History 4) Treatises, General Works 5) Law, Regulation 6) Study and teaching 7) Special subjects and subdivisions, progressing from the more general to the specific and as far as possible in logical order.

The general idea is to start the user off with more general works allowing them to become familiar with the field, its terminology and organisation. So, first you would find journals and dictionaries and further on materials concerning the theory and philosophy of the discipline followed by general works, regulations, teaching of the field and special subjects. One net effect of this organisation is to keep forms collocated within a discipline as well. This is quite different from DDC where form subdivisions allow formats to be scattered throughout the classification.

Geographical Arrangement and Alphabetical Arrangement

LCC uses various methods of subarrangement. In many cases, though, geographical subarrangement is preferred in order to sort materials on a specific subject by

geographic area. This is extremely useful for a government library where government members might find themselves interested in materials specific to a particular region of the country.

Economy of Notation and Close Classification

LCC uses much more compact notation than DDC allowing complex topics to be represented with short class numbers. Because LCC was developed to handle the increasing volume of information, it was designed to be more flexible and allow for more possible concepts. Thus, LCC is more likely to contain a predefined number for a given concept.

Synthetic Notation

LCC has no mnemonic devices and patterns of letters or numbers from different classes are completely unrelated. Despite this, LCC does allow for synthesis, but it operates differently from that used in DDC (and differently within its main classes too).

An example: Schedule B (Philosophy) at http://www.loc.gov/aba/cataloging/classification/lcco/lcco_b.pdf

Take a look at the distribution of concepts, at the hierarchy, and at the use of letters and numbers. One letter generally identifies a class (a disciplinary area) and two identify a division (a subdomain within that class). A span of numbers identifies specific topical areas and a scope note tells you what you will find in that area.

If you wanted to class a book on hypnotism, you could go to Psychology (BF on page 5 of the PDF) where you would find another outline with more specific topics. BF10011389 is listed under Psychology as the category for Parapsychology and BF1111-1156 is listed for Hypnotism among other things. From there, you could select BF1111 for a more specific number for books on hypnotism. (See LC classweb athttp://classificationweb.net/ for further possible numbers.)

Another example from Schedule B involves individual philosophers listed under B.

This is a list of Greek philosophers, which illustrates something of the complexity of LCC. Each philosopher may have one or more associated numbers depending on the popularity of their philosophies, and the extent to which their published works survived.

B215 Diogenes of Apollonia Table B-BJ4 B216 Diogenes - Empedocles Subarrange each by Table B-BJ5 B218 Empedocles Table B-BJ4 B219 Empedocles - Heraclitus Subarrange each by Table B-BJ5 B220-224 Heraclitus of Ephesus Table B-BJ3 B224.A-Z Special topics, A-Z B224.H37 Harmony B224.I43 Identity B224.L6 Logos B224.5 Heraclitus - Leucippus Subarrange each by Table B-BJ5

Philosophers with only a single number have fewer materials in the library. Heraclitus for example, has five numbers (220-224) and a list of subsidiary numbers showing you how to arrange the materials based on the topic. Notice the references to Tables B-BJ4 an B-BJ5. These tables provide additional information for subarranging works by these particular philosophers. The subarrangement is directly dependent on how many numbers a philosopher has.

Here is another example, this time from Economics. (HB Economic Theory-Demography).

Look at History of demography (HB 851)

History of demography HB851 General works HB852 Special schools HB853.A-Z By region or country, A-Z

Notice the first line is for general works, the second for special schools and the third says "By region or country, A-Z." This instruction indicates that the material would be organised alphabetically by country name using a Cutter number. These numbers can be generated using the Cutter table from the Subject Cataloguing Manual in Cataloguer's Desktop (http://desktop.loc.gov/) or in various places on the webhttp://libstaff.mit.edu/colserv/cat/lc/lc-cut.htm. Examples of Cutter Numbers are A7 for Argentina or N4 for Netherlands.

So, a book on the history of demography in Argentina would be classed as HB853 .A7.

Another example: Search for Mortality by country EB 1331-1527.

Economic theory. Demography--Demography. Population. Vital events--Deaths. Mortality--By region or country--America. Western Hemisphere HB1331-1528 By region or country Table H2 Add country number in table to HB1330 Under each: Apply Table HB1331/1 for 2 number countries

Apply Table HB1331/2 for 1 number countries Apply Table HB1331/2a for 2 number regions Apply Table HB1331/3 for 1 number regions HB1331 America. Western Hemisphere North America HB1333 General United States HB1335 General HB1337 Northeastern States. New England HB1339 Middle Atlantic States. Middle States HB1341 Southern States [...] HB1359-1360 Canada [etc.] [Excerpt from Mortality by Country HB1330 in LCC.]

It says to see Table H2 and add the appropriate country number from the table to HB1330.

For a book about demography in Canada, we would go to table H2 for 2 number countries. (Select Tables and search for the table by the LCC code H2 in LC Classweb.)

North America [H R] H2 3 General [H R]

United States [H R] H2 5 General [H R] H2 7 Northeastern States. New England [H R] H2 9 Middle Atlantic States. Middle States [H R] H2 11 Southern States [H R] [...] H2 23 Pacific States [H R] H2 25.A-.W States, A-W [H R] For list of Cutter numbers, see Table H28 Including regions or counties within a state H2 27.A-Z Cities, A-Z [H R] H2 29-30 Canada [H R] [Excerpt from LCC Table H2]

Canada has the number range 29-30. To get the full number for Canada, we add (instead of appending) the number to HB1330. This gives us HB1359 or HB1360, which is exactly the number range given for Canada. Thus you can see this would work for a country not listed in the schedules.

As you can see from these two examples, each part of the LCC is unique and has its own peculiarities. This is yet another reason it is used by highly specialised research libraries, where the librarians have subject degrees and work almost exclusively with material in a narrow intellectual range. A cataloguer would need to be familiar with the entire schedule of their particular area of focus in order to be effective. In large research libraries most academic librarians have a subject masters in addition to their LIS degrees.

Library of Congress

The Library of Congress has a number of committees responsible for maintaining and updating LCC. The outlines and schedules for each main class can be found on their website (http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/lcco/).

In the 1970s, many academic libraries began to reclassify their collections from DDC to LCC. Intellectual justifications for this tended to be based on the notion that Dewey was best suited to public libraries and that academic libraries should use a system which was organised by subject specialists. Also, libraries were attempting to cut costs by using copy cataloguing and the Library of Congress provided full LCC numbers with its catalogue cards. In truth, the two classifications provide more or less the same depth of coverage of intellectual content and DDC may in fact be more up to date and more centrally monitored. Recent research has demonstrated the mnemonic and synthetic features ofDDC are more amenable to use in online systems.

In Class Exercise: Classification Scavenger Hunt

A scavenger hunt to begin exploring the construction of DDC and LCC numbers.https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/kipp/public/courses/511/511exercisedeweyscavengerhunt.html

Tools

LC Classweb (http://classificationweb.net/) for LCC WebDewey (http://connexion.oclc.org/) for DDC WebDewey Tutorial http://www.oclc.org/DEWEY/resources/tutorial/

Further Readings

The Dewey Blog. http://ddc.typepad.com/ DDC Summaries http://www.oclc.org/dewey/resources/summaries/

LCC Outline http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/lcco/ Langridge, D.W. 1992. Classification: Its kinds, Elements, Systems, and Applications. London: Bowker Saur. p. 2-23.

Licence This material is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. Any commercial use of this work requires a separate licence (this includes websites that share ad revenue with you for uploading files). This work is not in the public domain.