Well, yes, but that is just the notation. If numbers 1 to 8 in a given section are used for "eight European countries" then some others get tossed into 9. Suppose that Czechoslovakia is is 93. Then you have the problem of what to do with Slovakia and Czech Republic. Assuming 91 through 98 are already used for eight more European countries, do you put them in 991 and 992? Of course the same could pertain to Yugoslavia, or to the various countries that were parts of Yugoslavia before it had that government.
Note that the above isn't intended as a detailed explication of Colon classification, and details may be wrong. However, I think it may illustrate the point. MANY years ago (almost 40) I wrote a paper in an advanced classification and cataloging class on this topic, specifically the advantages of using a faceted classification for geographic divisions. But the mind goes fuzzy. It is probably still in some box in my home office, but I'm not about to go looking for it.
And as to whether librarians resist or embrace change, two thoughts.
1) All of us embrace some changes and resist others. Think of any part of your life for examples.
2) When we're dealing with physical objects the changes are MUCH more difficult to make. If we were dealing with, say, closed stacks with books in accession number order (gee, does anyone still apply those to books?), then changing classifications would be relatively easy, as no changes on physical objects would be required, and no rearranging of those objects would be required. However, in a typical library that becomes nearly impossible. (Note, I said NEARLY impossible, since I've been heavily involved in 3 different DDC-->LC projects over the decades)
cheers
dan
Show Up, Suit Up, Shut Up, and Follow Directions
dan_at_riverofdata.com
Dan Lester, Boise, Idaho, USA
----- Original message ----------------------------------------
>Dan Lester wrote:
>> Ahhh, yes. But if you think Dewey is bad, take a look at LC. Even though not
>shoehorned into tens, it has the same issue of lack of room for expansion, for
>insertion of materials on new topics, and so forth. That will necessarily be true of
>ANY system that classifies.
>Well, I can't prove this, but Ranganathan, who was a mathematician, claimed that
>his colon classification was infinitely expandable due to his use of the number 9 to
>extend the notation at any point.
>--
>-----------------------------------
>Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
>kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
>ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet
>fx.: 510-848-3913
>mo.: 510-435-8234
>------------------------------------
Received on Tue Jun 05 2007 - 10:01:44 EDT