Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-bt4hw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T08:21:18.982Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The role and future of subject classification: the exploitation of resources

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2008

Rita Marcella
Rita Marcella
Affiliation:
School of information studies, Northumbria University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

‘Classification, then, is a tool for very simple but infinitely important purposes. Its whole object is to secure an order which will be useful to readers and to those who seek information with the smallest complication of search or other effort. It is a technique designed to expedite the full use of the knowledge stored in books and other material housed in the collection.’ (Maltby, 1975). Rita Marcella expounds her view of the importance of subject classification.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Legal Information Management , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , Summer 2002 , pp. 3 - 7
Copyright
Copyright © The British and Irish Association of Law Librarians 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Chan, L.M., Lin, X. and Zeng, M. L. (2000). Structural and multilingual approaches to subject access on the web. IFLA Journal, 26 (3), pp. 187–197.Google Scholar
Doyle, J. (1992). WESTLAW and the American digest classification scheme. Law Library journal, 84 (2), pp. 229–258.Google Scholar
Foskett, A. C. (2000). The future of faceted classification. In. The future of classifcation; edited by Marcella, R. and Maltby, A.. Aldershot: Gower.Google Scholar
Hunter, E. (2000). Do we still need classification? In. The future of classifcation; edited by Marcella, R. and Maltby, A.. Aldershot: Gower.Google Scholar
Kashyap, M. M. (2001). Similarity between Ranganthan's postulates for designing a scheme for library classification and Peter Pin-Sen Chen's entity relationship approach to data modelling and analysis. DESIDOC Bulletin of Information Technology, 21 (3), pp. 3–16.Google Scholar
MacLennan, A. (2000). Classification and the Internet. The future of classifcation; edited by Marcella, R. and Maltby, A.. Aldershot: Gower.Google Scholar
Maltby, A. (1975). Sayers' manual of classification for librarians. 5th ed.London: André Deutsch.Google Scholar
Moys, E.A. et al. (2001). Moy‘s’ classification and thesaurus for legal materials. Munich, Saur.Google Scholar
Quaresmo, P. and Rodrigues, I. P. (2000). Automatic classification and intelligent clustering for WWW information retrieval systems. Journal of Information, Law and Technology, 2000 (2). Available at http://elj.warwick.ac.ukljilt/00-21quaresma.html [Accessed June 2001.]Google Scholar
Wheatley, A. (2000). Subject trees on the Internet: a new role for bibliographic classification. Journal of Internet Cataloguing, 2 (3/4), pp. 115–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar