Page 22 - DLIS103_LIBRARY_CLASSIFICATION_AND_CATALOGUING_THEORY

Unit 2: Classification Schemes

Following the class number, the book number differentiates among books with the same ultimate Notes
class, and includes one or more of five parts: language number, date number, accession number,
volume number and supplement number. Notice that for both the class number and the book
number, some parts of the notation construction will be used as needed, and are not mandatory.
For example, if an item does not consist of volumes, the volume number will not be used. This
contributes to the flexible nature of the scheme.
The following example can aid one in understanding the parts of a CC call number:
The call number for works of literary criticism relating to Aristotle’s Poetics is O13 :1 :9x1. To
understand how this number was devised, we can separate the digits and explain what each
represents.
O is the digit representing the subject division, Literature. 13 represents the language division,
Greek, and this digit is followed by a colon. 1 represents the form division (within Literature) for
poetry. 9 is the digit for a special Common Subdivision that is specific to classes within Literature.
This digit is preceded by a colon and indicates that the work includes criticism. x is also a Common
Subdivision digit, but can be used with any class, and represents Collected works and selections.
1 represents the Favoured Category device. This device allows digits 1-9 to be reserved for highly
popular topics within the category, assuring priority in shelving for the most popular classes. In
this example of Greek literature, Aristotle received the digit 1 because of the great number of
items written about his work.

Challenges and Potential
In Ranganathan’s time, advantages and disadvantages of CC were discussed within the classification
community. The Madras Library Association hoped that it would be as widely circulated as its
predecessors and enable the libraries in India and elsewhere to get their resources classified and
arranged in an efficient, scientific, and serviceable manner. However, as Singh (1999) documents,
Ranganathan has little institutional support for his scheme. LC and DDC, established earlier, had
significant support financially, as well as scholastically. In a paper stating the opinion of the
Classification Research Group, several criticisms were made, including the concern that the five
categories in Ranganathan’s system did not fit all fields. In addition, it was noted that the system
made notations exceedingly lengthy and confusing.

Potential for Use in Online Systems

Acknowledging one of the same criticisms as Ranganathan’s contemporaries, Taylor also notes,
“The long notations created in faceted schemes are not easy to use for arranging physical information
packages on shelves”. Due to technological advancements that libraries have undertaken since
Ranganathan’s time, however, the potential for use of CC notation has increased. As Taylor
continues, in online catalogs they have the potential to be quite helpful, as each facet may be
searched independently.
As we have seen, there is inherent difficulty in arranging items in a physical space based upon any
classification scheme. Kashyap acknowledges that “the rules of traditional library codes have
been framed for well structured, but fixed display of information or data pertaining to the
bibliographic items on cards”. Kashyap goes on to recognize the limitations and difficulties users
encounter with current online catalogues because they are essentially a computer-based replacement
of the old card catalogue. He feels that the limitations online catalogues have, even now, can be
removed if CC, or another faceted classification system, is used. CC has more potential with
today’s technology, allowing for classification and retrieval of electronic information packages,
without the limitations imposed by physicality. Classifying using a faceted scheme allows for
non-linear retrieval, now made possible through electronic catalogues.

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 17