My ContentTheory of Library Classification Descriptive Theory J. D. Brown E.W. Hulme W. C. B. Sayers E.C. Richardson H. E. Bliss Dynamic Theory Ranganathan Basic Law Ranganathan Fundamental Law Library classificationPurpose and objective of Library classificationComponents of Library ClassificationCanons of classificationLibrary Classification Research Group and OrganizationsClassification Research Group (CRG), LondonFID/CA 1950Library Research circle (LRC) 1951Documentation Research and Training Centre (DRTC) 1962International Society for Knowledge organisation (ISKO) 1989Recent Developments in Classification Construction of thesauriStandard Switching languageAutomated ClassificationComputerized MARC ProjectUNISIST Plan for ClassificationSimple knowledge Organisation System (SKOS)TaxonomiesFolksonomy (2004 Thomas Vandar Wal)Tagging - Advantages and Disadvantages
Knowledge Organisation - Classification Theories, Cannons and Principles; simple Knowledge Organisation System (SKOS), Taxonomies, Folksonomy, Trends in Classification
Theory of Library Classification
Theory of library classification can be divided into two groups:
i Descriptive Theory
ii. Dynamic Theory
i. Decriptive Theory
The development of the descriptive theory is attributed to several stalwarts like Brown, Richardsom, Hulme, Sayers, Biliss and Ranganathan. The period between 1898 and 1937.
a. J. D. Brown
J.D. Brown contribution to the general theory of Library classification was small but significant. He brought out three different schemes of classification. The first of these three was developed Guinn-Brown Scheme in 1894 and Adjustable classification in 1897. Both Scheme did not make mach impact. In the year 1906, Brown Published the first edition of this "Subject classification, the scheme for which be is mostly known. Subject classification was founded on the principle that every science and art spring from some definite source. Brown also advocated - two other principles, the first of these two was his 'one place theory' and the other principle was the 'Science and its applications, theory'. Brown principles influenced the later theories of book-classification.
b. E.W. Hulme
Hulme published his book principles of book classification in the library Association Record. Has principle influenced the later theories of book-classification. According to Hulme, all classification cloud be arranged into two categories, Mechanical and philosophical. His theory of literacy warrant immensely attracted the attention of later classificationists. Literary warrant simple means that "a subject cannot be listed in the scheme unless some literature has already appeared on it." His principle of library warrant greatly influenced the Library of Congress classification (LCC).
c. W. C. B. Sayers
William charles Berwick Sayers (Teacher of S.R. Ranganathan) made a remarkable contribution to the development of the theory of classification. He is referred to as the first grammarian of library classification. He is responsible for interpreting and systematising the ideas of other theoreticians. His theory of book classification first appeared in 1915 under the title "Canons of classification". He expanded the outline of the theory contained in this book in three other books, viz. Grammer of classification (1915), Introduction to Library classification (1918) and Manual of Library classification (1926). Sayers simplified his theory of classification by starting 29 Principles. He called them canons, meaning rules, regulations, standard tests or criteria of classification. These 29 canons grouped under six categories as: canons of definition, canons of divisions, canons of terms, canons of book classification, canons of notation, canonis of book classification schemes.
d. E.C. Richardson
E.C. Richardson is regarded as the first classificationists to have made a systematic attempt to set down a theory of library classification. In 1910, he published his book "classification, theoretical and practical". In this work, he enumerated basic laws and principles meant to guide the work of designing a scheme of classification. These principles, called as criteria of classification, are as: Division of classes should be minute: Arrange things according to likeness and unlikeness; Books are collected for use, they are administered for use, and hence, it is the use, which is the motive behind classifications; A scheme of classification should be provided with a notation; The notation should be amenable to indefinite subdivisions preferably using a mixed symbol with decimal base and with mnemonic features.
e. H. E. Bliss
Bliss devoted his entire active life to the intensive study of the art and science of classification. He formulated scientific, philosophical and logical grounds for the study of bibliographic classification. His first work, titled "Organisation of Knowledge and the System of Science" (1929) and another work on the theory of library classification titled "Organisation of Knowledge in Libraries and the Subject Approach to Books". These two basic works convey to us the fundamental principle of classification which Bliss later tried to apply in his system of Bibliographic Classification (BC) published in 1935. The basic concepts of classification as expounded by Bliss may broadly be categorised as: Consensus; Subordination; Collocation; Alternative locations; Notation.
2. Dynamic Theory (1st ed - 1937 2nd ed -1957 3rd ed - 1967)
The dynamic theory of library classification, developed by Ranganathan between 1948 and 1955, was presented for the first time in the second edition of has prolegomena to library classification, published in 1957. A more advanced version of this theory appeared in thired edition of the Prolegomena Published in 1967. This dynamic theory has provided a sound and stable methodology for designing a scheme of library classification. This has also helped the classificationists to keep pace with the developments in the universe of knowledge to design more stable scheme, of classification.
The formulation of a dynamic theory of library classification was marked by the recognition and separation of three planes of work: The Idea phine, the verbal plane and the Notional plane.
Ranganathan formulated the General Theory of classification, which was guided by Basis Laws, laws of library science, Canons, Principles, the mapping of the universe of Knowledge in a scheme of classification could be successfully represented.
Barrie Laws : Ranganathan formulated six basic laws, of Normative Principles.
i. Law of interpretation (legal Documents need to be modified)
ii. Law of Impartiality (Facts
iii. Law of Symmetry (equal proportion of blance or equal weightage two entities)
iv. Law of Parsimony (thrift on quality of being shingy or using maney resources not waste fully)
v. Law of Local Variation ( Local area need classification and collect develop and special collection)
vi. Law of Osmosis ( Knowledge and idea is assimilation)
These basic laws govern the thinking process in general. these may be involved when two or more laws of library science or canons for classification lead to conflicting or equal valid different decisions. Resolved to basic law Tow or more canons or principles conflicting resolved five law of library science.
Law of library science Ranganathan five laws of library science are : Fundamental law
i. Books are for use
ii. Every reader his/her book
iii. Every book its reader
iv. Save the time of the reader
v. A library is a growing organism
These laws have an impact on library functionis and are invoked when two on more cannons or principles of classification lead to conflicting or equally valid alternate decisions. These are useful in every branch of library and information science.
Postulates-for Facets
The most significant contribution to the theory of classification is the enunciation, of postulates dealing with the concept of facet analysis and fundamental categories.
Fundamental Categories
A subject may manifest itself in anyone or all of the fundamental categories. He postulated that "There are fire and only f ire fundamental categories, namely Time Space, Energy, Matter and Personality", PMEST for short.
Facet Sequences
The fire fundamental categories form the following sequence when they are arranged according to their decreasing concreteness PMEST. Rounds of "Emergy": Ranganathan also postulated that 'the fundamental category energy may manifest itself in one and die some subject more than once". These manifestationis of energy are called rounds of manifestations. Similarly, the fundamental categories personality and matter may manifest themselves in Round 1" Round 2 and so on.
Round and Levels
He further postulated that the fundamental categories personality and matter may manifest themselves more than once in one and the same round with in a subject. The first manifestation of a fundamental category within a round is said to be it's level 1 facet in that round, library classification space and time manifest themselves in the last round.
Principles of Facet Sequence
Ranganathan formulated four principles of Facet Sequence, viz.,
i. Wall - Picture Principle
ii. Whole- organ Principle
iii. Cow-calf Principle
iv. Actand Action - Actor-tool Principle.
These principles guide us in deciding the sequence of facets, which may appear in a compound subject.
Principles of Helpful Sequency
To achieve a helpful sequence of entities in an array, Ranganathan formulated eight principles of helpful sequence. These are
1. Principle of later-in-Time
2. Principle of Later - in - Evolution
3. Principle of Spatial contiguity
3.1 Principle for Entities along a vertical Line :
3.1.1 Principle of Bottom Upwards
3.1.2 Principle of Top Downwards.
3.2 Principle for Entities along a Horizontal Line:
3.2.1 Principle of Left to Right
3.2.2 Principle of Right to left
3.3 Principles of Entities along a circular Line:
3.3.1 Principles of clockwise Direction.
3.3.2 Principle of counter-clockwise Direction
3.4. Principle for Entities along long radial Line:
3.4.1 Principle of centre to Periphery
3.4.2 Principle of periphery to centre
3.5 Principle of Away-form- Position
4. Principles for quantilative Measure
4.1 Principle of Increasing quantity
4.2 Principle of Decreasing quantity
5. Principle of Increasing complexity
6. Principle of Canonical Sequence
7. Principle of Literary warrant.
8. Principle of Alphabetical Sequence.
Library classification
The word classification is derived from the "Latin" word "classis". Classification is a process to categorisation, the process in which ideas and objects are differentiated and recognised. Library classification deals with the organizing of library materials, related with the arrangement of documents in the library in a manner that the readers are served in the best possible way. According to W.·C. B. Sayers, library classification is "the arrangement of books on shelves or descriptions of them, in the manner which is most useful to those who read."
According to Dr. S. R. Ranganathan, library Classification is meant to be "the translation of the name of the subject of a book into a preferred artificial language of ordinal numbers, and the individualization of the several books dealing with the same specific subject by means of further set of ordinal numbers which represent Some features of the book other than their thought content".
Dr. S. R. Ranganathan has defined classification in five senses as mentioned below:
i. Division: which means grouping of same characteristics.
ii. Assortment: which is the process of division of a universe of knowledge into groups, in addition to arranging the groups in a definite sequence that is assigning a range to each resulting group.
iii. Ordinal Numbers in a filiatory Sequence: Which is practiced on a wide scale.
iv. Filiatory Sequence Coupled with class Numbers: In a filiatory sequence, each multiple class formed in the process of complete assortment is incorporated in its filiatory sequence.
v. Unique class Number : " Each class has unique class Number representing it".
Classification : Classification is a process to categorisation, the process in which ideas and objects are differentiated and recognised.
Classificationist : Person who designs a classification scheme/system.
Classifier : Person who operates a classification scheme/ system.
Purpose and objective of Library classification
The main purpose and objective of library classification is to arrange the library documents in a helpful sequence for the convenience of both the readers and the staff in the library. The following are the main purposes and objectives of library classification :
i. Helpful Sequence: Classification helps in organizing the documents in classes based on the mutual relationship between them which would bring together all closely related classes.
ii. Saves the time of user: Fourth law of library science is saves the time of the reader, and by the classification and arrangement by subject. Saves a lot of time of readers as well as of staff to retrieve the documents.
iii. Books in an order: Classification arranges books in an onder most convenient to the readers. classification brings together all the books on the same subject. Not only that, books an different branches of the subjects are also collated in a way that their mutual relationship is clearly displayed.
iv. Retrieval and Arrangement : classification helps in organizing and retrieval of document.
v. Mechanized Arrangement: It means sequence should be determined.
vi. Right Place for New Document: Library classification should help in finding the most helpful in place for new document among the existing collection of the library.
vii. Compilation of catalogue: classification helps in compilation of bibliographies, catalogues and union catalogues.
Components of Library Classification
Library classification is a process of translating the specific subject of a book into an artificial language of ordinal numbers, which in classificatory language are helpful in arriving at a logical arrangement. The essential components of a scheme of library Classification are :
i. Schedule
A schedule is a systematic list of classes and their subdivision arranged in a logical way. It is the core of the classification system. Classification schedules compraise the following elements:
a. Main classes : Universe of knowledge is divided into a broader perspective and f irst division is by broad classed called main classes. All current classification base their main classes on divisions by discipline. 10 Main classes -100 division →1000 subdivision → shedule
b. Division and Subdivision : The division and subdivision of main classes hierarchically.
c. Facets : Facets, generated by facet analysis, sub facets (arrays), formed by the subdivision of the facets.
d. Generalia class : There are certain books such as encyclopedias, bibliographies and collected writings of an author which cannot be classified under any specific subject since they cover all subjects, under the sun and hence are classified under the Generalia class.
ii. Notation
Notation which is a sort of a code using numbers and / or letters that have a readily understood order, and which guides the arrangement of subjects in the schedules and documents on shelves. There are two types of notation by: pure and mixed. Mixed notation is obviously comprised of two or more species of digits.
iii. Index
An alphabetical index to locate terms within lengthy and mazy schedules. Index is an essential component of a scheme of library classification which is provided at the end of the scheme. It is of immense value to the members in their handling of a classified part of the knowledge.
iv. Form Division
Knowledge may be presented in one form of the other, the form could be text book, manual, history, dictionary and encyclopedia. These forms or styles of presenting knowledge of a subject could be commonly applied to any subject. Book classification takes care of representing form in the call Number. The numbers representing the forms of books are called form divisions. They are also know as common sub-division on common-isolates.
v. Call Number
A number by which a book is called for particularly a closed access library. In classifying, each book is provided with a distinguished number specified to it which can be used for calling the book from the stats and replacing it on its right place. It is known as a Call Number. This call Number fixes the position of a book on any document in a sequence and helps to locate it through its entry in the catalogue. Each document has its own individual call number which comprises, of class numbers which represents the thought content of the book and the book number also collection number.
Call Number = class No + Book No. + Collection no
Canons of classification
The first used of 'canon' in classification by W. C. B. Sayers. His theory of book classification first appeared in 1915 under the title 'canons of classification'. S. R. Ranganathan provided a completely new direction to the concept of canons in classification originally formulated by W. C. B. Sayers, Ranganathan formulated 43 Canons and grouped them into three planes of work- idea plane, verbal plane and Notational plane. Canons means a rule, regulation or law.
I. Canons for Idea Plane (15)
II. Canons for Verbal Plane (4)
III. Canons for Notation Plane (24)
There are in total conformity with his basic laws and laws of library science. These are normally invoked in the design of a scheme of library classification. Let us now discuss briefly these three groups of canons.
I. Canons for Idea Plane (15) : The fifteen canons for Idea plane are further grouped into
i. Canon for characteristics - 4
ii. Canon for succession of characteristics - 3
iii. Canons for Array - 4
iv. Canons for chain - 2
v. Canons for fuliatory sequence - 2
II. Canons for Verbal Plane (4)
The four canons for verbal plane deal with the language and terminology aspects in a scheme of classification. The terminology used in the scheme should clearly indicate the context in which a particular term has been used and what aspects it comprehends. The terms used to denote concepts should be current and non-critical. The four canons are :
i. Canons of Context.
ii. Canon of Enumeration
iii. Canon of currency
iv. Canon of Reticence
III. Canons for Notational Plane (24)
There have been further grouped into
i. Basic cannons - 12
ii. Mnemonics - 5
iii. Growing universe - 4
iv. Book classification - 3
Library Classification Research Group and Organizations
During the past five decades, it is not only the individuals but several organizations, societies and research groups who have taken up the cause of library classification. They have carried on various research activities to provide a totally neal direction to library classification and to transform it into an effective tool not only for shelf arrangement but also knowledge organization.
Classification Research Group (CRG), London
CRG is a group of working librarians and others interested in classification research in London in 1952. CRG consists of people who are keenly interested in classification research. CRG made a major contribution in the field of classification research.
FID/CA 1950
It was on the initiative of Dr. Ranganathan that FID formed a committee on classification Theory (FID/CA) in the year 1950. Later in 1961, FID/CA was ranamed as the committee on classification research (FID/CA).
Library Research circle (LRC) 1951
The Library Research Circle (LRC) was founded in Delhi by S. R. Ranganathan in 1951. This circle used to meet on sundays at Ranganathon's residence to pursue research on various aspects of classification, particularly relating to colon classification.
Documentation Research and Training Centre (DRTC) 1962
DRTC was established in Bangalore in 1962 by S.R. Ranganathan. It actively promoted different levels of research in library classification. These are: Development research to develop depth schedules; fundamental research to develop postulates and principles; and systematic testing of depth schedules developed by faculty and alumni of DRTC.
International Society for Knowledge organisation (ISKO) 1989
ISKO was founded at Frankfurt, Germany in 1989 and founder president was Dr. Ingetrout Dahlberg. The main aim of ISKO is "to promote research development and application of all methods for organization of knowledge in general and in particular fields, by integrating especially the conceptual approaches of classification research an artificial intelligence. The society stresses philosophical, psychological and systematic approaches for conceptual objects".
Recent Developments in Classification Construction of thesauri
Various Thesauri have been constructed with the help of classification schemes since these schemes function as the one of major sources for selection and getting most of the used terms in thesauri.
Standard Switching language
Due to the explosion of knowledge, the requirement of standard switching language was felt for the timely use of indexing terms and in indexing language and UDC was treated suitable for using this switching language, as it was at that time suitable for retrieval and dissemination of information. FID is using UDC for constructing Thesauri and terminology.
Automated Classification
By doing so many experiments in the field of automated classification process and system, the efforts have been made to develop the same. The use of automated classification in a specific database is becoming more helpful.
Computerized MARC Project
The information storage its being transformed into micro. and machine readable forms. Hence there is a requirement to develop an advanced classification scheme, which can be useful in this age of information technology: Library of Congress (LC) and Dewey Decimal classification (DDC), Schemes are being used in the MARC project.
UNISIST Plan for Classification
UNISIST planned for a universal information system and network, for which the need is to provide classification schemes in a new pattern because the present classification schemes do not have the efficiency of organizing the computerized stored information.
Simple knowledge Organisation System (SKOS)
SKOS is a common data model for knowledge organization system such as thesauri, classification scheme, subject heading system and taxonomies. Abstract: This paper presents the new language designed to represent controlled vocabularies such as thesauri, classification schemes, taxonomies, glossaries, in a more simple way than ontology language does. Simple knowledge Organisation System (SKOS) represents a family of formal languagers designed to express knowledge structures for use on the semantic web. SKOS is currently developed within the W3C framework.
Keywords and phrases : SKOS, thesauri, classification schemes, taxonomies. glossaries, semantic web, XML, RDF (Resources Description Framework), OWL (ontology web language), controlled Vocabularies,
Introduction : it is well known that today finding an information on web that you know it exists somewhere within it is a problem of you are not weanling to sacrifice a lot of time, energy and may be money. Because textual content based search has limitations regarding resources auth little or no contextual meaning, synonyms words or words with multiple meanings and search across natural languages, web resources where annotated with meaningful statements about conceptual aspects of their content. Metadata creates in this way semantic relations between resources leading to a "new" web, semantic web.
The vision about semantic web is to become an extension of the current web in which information has a well defined meaning and is better understood and process by the computers. In practice semantic web represents a framework for creating, semantically search and managing metadata for web resources. when we create a metadata we need to refer to shared group of concepts that is common to a community and to describe the domain of interest for that community. This can be done by creating a selection of standardized terms with f ixed meaning used to help metadata creators to describe a resource. In this way we can avoid ambiguity. Control synonyms and polysemy in our research. This set of standard terms represent controlled vocabulary which can be a simple list of defined terms from which a metadata creator chooses a suitable one or might be a complex thesaurus made up of hierarchical relationships and synonyms. Controlled vocabularies are useful because they help metadata creators and searchers to use common meanings. To create controlled vocabularies we need a simple language to describe concept and concept schemes. Semantic web already offers languages like RDS and OWL. The Resource Description Framework (RDF) is a language for making statements about resources but provides only the low level semantics required for metadata statements. The OWL language by the other hand, provides the necessary semantic level to describe resources but it demands effort, expertise therefore costs because it is a class-oriented language and requires a precise logically modeling. Therefore there is a need for a language simple enough like RDF that does not required so much effort and expertise, bur power enough to define complex conceptual structures and to support systematically search like out does. For this purpose it was created a new language SKOS.
This paper introducers the SKOS an extensible RDF langage for describing concept and content of concept scheme (taxonomies, glossaries, classification schemes and thesaur) that include semantic relationships between these concepts. SKOS core represents the core model for expressing the basic structure and content of a concept scheme 1. SKOS core vocabulary is a set of RDF properties and RDFS classes that can be used to express the content and structure of a concept scheme as an RDF graph 2. The SKOS core guide and the SKOS core vocabulary specification are currently working drafts for w3c working group notes. They present the basic metamodel consisting of an RDF/OWL scheme, an explanation of the feature that the properties and classes of the scheme represent. Currently they are at the proposal stage within w3c.
This paper goes on in presenting some applied examples of controlled vocabulary in RDF and then we analyze the difference between SKOS core and other semantic web vocabularies.
Applied examples of SKOS
i. A Glossary example.
ii. A Taxonomy example
iii. A Thesaurus example
S.R. Ranganathan
Levels Name of Normative Principles
1. Basic process of thinking. Basic laws
2. Library Science. Fundamental law
3. Classification. Canons
4. Helpful sequence in Array. Principles
5. Work of classifying. Pastulates an Principles for fact sequence
Taxonomies
Define of Toxonomy: Toxonomy is the practice of identifying different organiers, classifying them into categories and naming them.
Paper 1 Teaching Amplitude 34 page
Folksonomy (2004 Thomas Vandar Wal)
Folksonomy is a classification system in which end users apply public tags to online items, typically to make those items easier for themselves or others to find later.
Another Name Folksonomy is also known as Social tagging, Collaborative tagging, Social Classification and Social bookmarking.
It allows users to classify websites, pictures, documents and othey forms of data so that content may be easily categorized and located by users.
The term was coined by Thomas Vandar Wal in 2004 as a portmanteau of folk and taxonomy. Folksonomies became popular as part of social software application such as social bookmarking and photograph annotation that enable users to collectively classify and find information via shared tages.
Anybody can add whatever hashtags they want. There are no rules, so you might see a single item hashtagged with anything from "#cute" to "catsofinstogram".
The first example is broad taxonomy, meaning it can apply to a lot of different types of content.
But '# catsofinstagram' only applies to one type of content (photos of a cat on instagram), making it an example of narrow toxonomy.
Tagging - Advantages and Disadvantages
Folksonomies are a trade-off between traditional centralized classification and no classification at all, and have several advantages.
Tagging is easy to understand and do, even without training and previous knowledge in classification or indexing.
Folksonomies are flexible, in the sense that the user can add or remove tage. Tags enable the creation of communities, in the sense that users who apply the same tag have a common interest.
There are several disadvantages with the use of tags and folksonomies as well. For example, the simplicity in tagging can result in poorly applied tags.
Further, while controlled vocabularies are exclusionary by nature, tags are often ambiguous and overly personalized. Trends in Classification.
Trends in Classification : Blanks
No comments:
Post a Comment