Chapter 5

Origin (2007)

Chapter 3 : The difference between library of congress classification system

 

The difference between library of congress

- Tsering Wangyal ShawaThe main aim of any classification scheme is to organize the information in a group, so that the organized materials can be found easily by the user. The classifications of books and cartographic materials are different. Books are classified on the basis of subject, whereas the cartographic materials are classified on the basis of area. "It is estimated that ninety-five per cent of map reference requests require searching by area-subject entries. A survey of 360 map libraries in the United States made by a committee of the special Libraries Association, Geography and Map Division, of the United States of America in 1953 revealed that in seventy-two per cent of the libraries, maps were most often requested by area alone, or qualified by date or subject. They were seldom requested by author or by title." Wallis, (1960). The cartographic materials include atlas, globe, maps, views, cross-sections, plans, remote sensing imagery, etc.

Different classification systems such as BOGGS, Dewey Decimal Classification, Universal Decimal Classification, Ministry of Defence (UK), and the American Geographical Society systems have been developed for cartographic materials over the years, however, the Library of Congress classification scheme for cartographic materials is the best classification system. This Classification is based on an alphanumeric system, and it is contained in the Schedule G of the Library of Congress classification system. The Schedule G of the Library of Congress cartographic section is broadly divided into atlases, globes, and maps. Each of these are given blocks of numbers such as G1000.3 - 3122 for atlases, G3160-3182 for globes, and G 3190-9999 for maps. Some blocks of numbers were not assigned and left for future use. This paper will focus on the Library of Congress map classification system, that is, how the maps are classified between the block number G 3190-9999.

The Library of Congress devised the cartographic materials classification system in 1900 and its first edition of the cartographic classification was published in 1910. Since then, four major editions have been published. The cartographic classification is based on an area and hence, it is divided into a hierarchical system. The first category is the universe or the solar system. That is followed by the world map, then by continents, which are further subdivided either by regions and natural features, or by political divisions such as countries. The following is a summary of the Library of Congress classification system for maps.

Universe, solar system           3190-3192
World                            3200-3202
North America                    3290-3292
Canada                           3400-3654
United States                    3700-3702
By states                        3710-4374
South America                    4400-4402
By country                       4410-5663
Europe                           5700-5702
By country                       5720-6985
Asia                             7400-7402
By country and area              7405-8192
Africa                           8200-8202
By country and area              8210-8904
Australasia                      8960-8959
By country                       8960-9080
Atlantic Ocean                   9100-9172
Indian Ocean                     9175-9227
Pacific Ocean                    9230-9774
Arctic Ocean                     9780-9797
Antarctica                       9800-9802
Unlocalized maps                 9900-9999

  

The maps of the universe, the world, and the continents are further classified as general maps, thematic maps, and regional or natural features maps. These are assigned different numbers at the end of their classification numbers such as '0' for general maps, '1' for thematic and '2' for regional or natural features.

The thematic maps are further classified on the basis of topics. They are broadly divided into seventeen classes, with a different letter for each group. These groups are further subdivided on the basis of more detailed topics. For example, a Physical Map of North America will be classified as G; 3291 .C2, whereas a Geological Map of North America will be classified as G;3291 .C5. Both of the maps are part of one theme, that is, physical science, however, they are also subdivided by more detailed topics. The thematic classification scheme can be used in conjunction with other subclassifications. Examples of these groups will be discussed later in this paper. Below is a listing of major classifications of thematic maps:

A Special categories

B Mathematical geography

C Physical sciences

D Biogeography

E Human and cultural geography. Anthropogeography. Human ecology.

F Political geography

G Economic geography

H Mines and mineral resources

J Agriculture

K Forests and forestry

L Aquatic biological resources

M Manufacturing and processing. Service industries.

N Technology. Engineering. Public works.

P Transportation and communication

Q Commerce  and trade. Finance

R Military and naval geography

S Historical geography

Unlike the maps of the universe, the world, and the continents that are classified into three subgroups, the maps created by political divisions or map of the countries are classified into five subgroups on the basis of their subjects. These subgroups are assigned different numbers at the end of their classified numbers such as:

0 or 5 General maps

1 or 6 Thematic maps

2 or 7 Regions, natural features etc.

3 or 8  Major political division (states, provinces, counties, districts maps)

4 or 9  Cities or towns maps.  

Let us examine how the maps are classified into the above groups. General maps are those maps which are meant for general purposes and cover very general topics. They are given number '0' or '5' after third digit of the classified block number. The maps which depict one particular topic such as military maps, highway maps, or tourist maps are classified as thematic maps. They are classified under number '1' or '6'. The maps featuring river valleys, mountain ranges, deserts, and maps covering three or more political divisions are classified under number '2' or '7'. The major political divisions, such as counties and districts, are classified under number '3' or '8'. The smallest subdivisions of political units, like cities and towns, are grouped under number '4' or '9'.

Classification of maps is not simple; there are many maps which not only cover one political unit, but also cross over other political areas. An example is the map of the Allegheny River. The river is located both in Pennsylvania and in New York State, however, most of the river is located in Pennsylvania and hence, the map will be classified under Pennsylvania. Sometimes a map covers equal parts of two political units, such as a map of the Delaware Bay. This Bay is located equally in Delaware and New Jersey. In a case like this, the map should be classified under whichever area comes first alphabetically and therefore, a map of the Delaware Bay is classified under Delaware state. When a natural feature or other subject in the map covers three or more administrative divisions, it is classified slightly differently. An example is the map showing the Appalachian Mountains. This type of map is classified under larger geographical region, hence the Appalachian Mountains is grouped under Eastern United States(Larsgaard 1987, 87).

The information on a map is not necessarily as simple as the above examples. There are maps which will show more than one type of information, such as the Rainfall Map of Wenatchee National Forest. This type of map is classified first under the state, because the National Forest is located in Washington state (G; 4280), then under the region, because Wenatchee National Forest is one distinct region in Washington state. In this case the classification number will change from G; 4280 to G; 4282 then add its cutter number that is, .W4 so that this map will be classified G; 4282 .W4, under Wenatchee National Forest. The same map is then further classified under topic, in this case rainfall, and hence it is grouped under the rainfall category (in the thematic classification, 'C' stands for Physical sciences and 'C883' represents rainfall). This map will be classified as G; 4282 .W4C883. The rules of the Library of Congress classification state that "a subject cutter may be added after another cutter for political or geographic subdivision (making a total of 3 cutters for the map) but a geographic cutter never follows a subject cutter.

The county, city, and town maps representing various topics will be classified in a similar manner. However, smaller political divisions within major political divisions such as cities or towns are classified slightly differently by the use of the colon followed by the number such as the number '2' for geographic subdivision and the number '3' for a political subdivision. For example, the map showing the location of JFK International Airport will be classified as G; 3804 .N4:2J6. The number G; 3804 is designated for the city or town in the state of New York and '.N4' is the cutter for New York City. Since JFK airport is an important geographical subdivision within New York City ':2' is used after 'N4' in order to differentiate a JFK airport map from other New York City maps. 'J6' is the cutter for JFK International Airport. The Map of Queens (a part of New York City ) could be classified as G; 3804 .N4:3Q4. The ':3' is used after the 'N4' because Queens is one of the political subdivisions of New York City and 'Q4' is the cutter for Queens. A transportation map of Queens could be classified as G; 3804 .N4:3Q4 P1. since the 'P1' stands for transportation under the thematic subclassification (LC Subject Cataloging Division. 1976, 207).

The date of a situation or the date of publication of the map and the cutter for the statement of responsibility are all used in conjunction with the above classification system in order to further classify the maps. Often the date of information or situation is not stated on the map; in such cases the date of publication is used.

While classifying maps, the main class number is always for the main geographic area shown on the map. It can be further subdivided by using cutter numbers first for geographic subareas, and then for the topic content. After the topic content of the map is the date of the situation, and then the cutter for the main entry (the statement of responsibility). For example, "The Geology Map of New York City" published by the United States Geological Survey in 1990 will be classified as G; 3804 .N4C5 1990 U5. In Physical Sciences 'C' section of the thematic classification, the 'C5' stands for geology, '1990' is the year of publication and 'U5' is the cutter for USGS.

Sometime a map is a facsimile or formally published reprint. In a situation like this there will be a second date after the main entry cutter - the date of publication of the reprint. One example is the Map of Ithaca, NY drawn by L. R. Burleigh, first published in 1865 and reproduced in 1970 by Historic Urban Plan, Ithaca. This map will be classified as G;3804 .I7 1865 B8 1970. The 'G; 3804' is the classification number for the city or town in New York state, 'I7' is the cutter number for Ithaca, '1865' is the date of the situation, 'B8' is the cutter for the author and '1970' is the date of reproduction.

The classification of series maps is slightly different from the above system. In the series classification, the date in the call number is replaced by the denominator of the R.F. (Representational Fraction ) scale minus the last three digits, and by a lowercase letter 's'. For example, the series map of New York State with R.F. scale of 1:25,000 and published by the USGS will be classified as G; 3800 s25 U5. Similarly, "The Ethnolinguistics Map of New York State" with R.F. scale of 1:500,000 and published by the Cram Company will be classified as G; 3801 E3 s500 C7. The main difference between the series classification and the rest of the map classification systems is the replacement of the date of situation or the date of publication with the scale.

The Library of Congress Schedule G Classification for maps is not free from weakness. It does not have a good classification scheme for those countries for which the Library of Congress has few maps. It is also weak for countries considered politically insignificant and regions which are not properly mapped. Another weakness is that since the Schedule G classification system is based on area and political boundaries, this results in problems when countries break up into separate political entities. For example, Moscow used to be classified as a city in the Soviet Union (G; 7004 .M6). Now it is no longer classified under the Soviet Union, but under Russia (G; 7064 .M7). This change in classification is due to a change in political boundaries. Another problem concerns the classification of regions. The United States Board on Geographic Names has established geographic names, and the Library of Congress uses this Board as its authority on geographic names. If the Board fails to established regional geographic names in time (it happens quite often), then the Library of Congress is forced to classify the region using an unestablished geographic name. This later complicates the classification system. However, the Library of Congress map classification scheme is the most widely used system in United States academic libraries, and in libraries around the world. This classification scheme is not only the de facto classification system for maps but it is also the best system in the world for the classification of cartographic materials.

References

1. Larsgaard, Mary Lynette. Map Librarianship: An Introduction. Second Edition. Littleton, Colorado, Libraries Unlimited, Inc. 1987
2. Library of Congress, Subject Cataloguing Division. Classification: Class G; Geography, maps, anthropology, recreation 4th ed. Washington, Library of Congress. 1976
3. Nichols, Harold. Map Librarianship. Second Edition. London, Clive Bingley Ltd. 1982
4. Parry, R.B. & Perkins, C.R. Information Sources in Cartography. London, Bowker-Suar Ltd. 1990
5. Wallis, H. "The role of a national map library". Cartographic Journal, V.3, P.11-13, 1966.

Source: http://www.princeton.edu/~shawatw/classifi.html

Chapter 2 Objective & Subjective

1. Objective Facts:Ex.

History of Art

     The History of art refers to visual art which may be defined as any activity or product made by humans in a visual form for aesthetical or communicative purposes, expressing ideas, emotions or, in general, a worldview. Over time art has been classified in diverse ways, from the medieval distinction between liberal arts and
mechanical arts, to the modern distinction between fine arts and applied arts, or to the many contemporary definitions, which define art as a manifestation of human creativity. The subsequent expansion of the list of principal arts in the 20th century reached to nine: architecture, dance, sculpture, music, painting, poetry (described broadly as a form of literature with aesthetic purpose or function, which also includes the distinct genres of theatre and narrative), film, photography and comics. At the conceptual overlap of terms between plastic arts and visual arts were added design and graphic arts. In addition to the old forms of artistic expression such as fashion and gastronomy, new modes of expression are being considered as arts such as video, computer art, performance, advertising, animation, television and videogames.
The History of art is a multidisciplinary science, seeking an objective examination of art throughout time, classifying cultures, establishing periodizations and observing the distinctive and influential characteristics of art. The study of the history of art was initially developed in the Renaissance, with its limited scope being the artistic production of western civilization. However, as time has passed, it has imposed a broader view of artistic history, seeking a comprehensive overview of all the civilizations and analysis of their artistic production in terms of their own cultural values (cultural relativism), and not just western art history.
Today, art enjoys a wide network of study, dissemination and preservation of all the artistic legacy of mankind throughout history. The 20th century has seen the proliferation of institutions, foundations, art museums and galleries, in both the public and private sectors, dedicated to the analysis and cataloging of works of art as well as exhibitions aimed at a mainstream audience. The rise of media has been crucial in improving the study and dissemination of art. International events and exhibitions like the Whitney Biennial and biennales of Venice and São Paulo or the Documenta of Kassel have helped the development of new styles and trends. Prizes such as the Turner of the Tate Gallery, the the Wolf Prize in Arts, the Pritzker Prize of architecture, the Pulitzer of photography and the Oscar of cinema also promote the best creative work on an international level. Institutions like UNESCO, with the establishment of the World Heritage Site lists, also help the conservation of the major monuments of the planet.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_art

2.Subjective facts:
Ex.

 Valentine's Day
    

     The Valentine Day is symbol of Love. The day is celebrated in memory of Saint Valentine, "the love prophet". Valentine's Day is an occasion when there is romance everywhere. One cannot find a better day to express their feelings for anyone throughout the year. This day is best to propose your boyfriend or girlfriend with a wonderful gift along with your message of love.

    
     Valentine Day fever is about to reach its climax, and people are busy in planning ideas of best Valentines Day gift for their beloved. It is always a very tough task to decide about a gift for beloved. Specially on occasion of Valentine Day, because people want to present the best possible thing
which must be unique in terms of beauty and appearance as well as should act like a memorabilia for long time. The gift should be capable enough to represent the true intensity of your love, care and affection for your beloved.
     Valentine day is an occasion for you to show how much you love him/her. If you have not yet proposed him/her and waiting for suitable time to express your feelings, there is no better day. Put your heartiest feelings with an exclusive valentine gift. A diamond ring is undoubtedly the best option to gift your beloved. A diamond is forever, and so will be your love for her. Nothing can beat the impact of receiving a diamond ring from beloved. You want to express your lifelong commitment, your unconditional love till eternity, and your blind faith on your beloved, the diamond ring will make it easier for you by emphasizing your emotions with its glitter and beauty.

Source: http://www.articleworld.net/articles/25417/1/The-Best-Valentine-Gift
             http://www.articleworld.net

    

Chapter1 : Data,Information,Knowledge,Wisdom

Data, Information, Knowledge, and Wisdom

   There is probably no segment of activity in the world attracting as much attention at present as that

of knowledge management. Yet as I entered this arena of activity I quickly found there didn't seem

to be a wealth of sources that seemed to make sense in terms of defining what knowledge actually

was, and how was it differentiated from data, information, and wisdom. What follows is the current

level of understanding I have been able to piece together regarding data, information, knowledge,

and wisdom. I figured to understand one of them I had to understand all of them.

According to Russell Ackoff, a systems theorist and professor of organizational change, the content

of the human mind can be classified into five categories:

Data

... data is raw. It simply exists and has no significance beyond its existence (in and of itself). It

can exist in any form, usable or not. It does not have meaning of itself. In computer parlance, a

spreadsheet generally starts out by holding data.

Information

... information is data that has been given meaning by way of relational connection.

This "meaning" can be useful, but does not have to be. In computer parlance, a relational database

makes information from the data stored within it.

Knowledge

... knowledge is the appropriate collection of information, such that it's intent is to be

useful. Knowledge is a deterministic process. When someone "memorizes" information (as lessaspiring

test-bound students often do), then they have amassed knowledge. This knowledge has

useful meaning to them, but it does not provide for, in and of itself, an integration such as would

infer further knowledge. For example, elementary school children memorize, or amass knowledge

of, the "times table". They can tell you that "2 x 2 = 4" because they have amassed that knowledge

(it being included in the times table). But when asked what is "1267 x 300", they can not respond

correctly because that entry is not in their times table. To correctly answer such a question requires

a true cognitive and analytical ability that is only encompassed in the next level... understanding. In

computer parlance, most of the applications we use (modeling, simulation, etc.) exercise some type

of stored knowledge.

Understanding

... understanding is an interpolative and probabilistic process. It is cognitive and

analytical. It is the process by which I can take knowledge and synthesize new knowledge from the

previously held knowledge. The difference between understanding and knowledge is the difference

between "learning" and "memorizing". People who have understanding can undertake useful actions

because they can synthesize new knowledge, or in some cases, at least new information, from what

is previously known (and understood). That is, understanding can build upon currently held

information, knowledge and understanding itself. In computer parlance, AI systems possess

understanding in the sense that they are able to synthesize new knowledge from previously stored

information and knowledge.

Wisdom

... wisdom is an extrapolative and non-deterministic, non-probabilistic process. It calls

upon all the previous levels of consciousness, and specifically upon special types of human

programming (moral, ethical codes, etc.). It beckons to give us understanding about which there has

previously been no understanding, and in doing so, goes far beyond understanding itself. It is the

essence of philosophical probing. Unlike the previous four levels, it asks questions to which there is

no (easily-achievable) answer, and in some cases, to which there can be no humanly-known answer

period. Wisdom is therefore, the process by which we also discern, or judge, between right and

wrong, good and bad. I personally believe that computers do not have, and will never have the

ability to posses wisdom. Wisdom is a uniquely human state, or as I see it, wisdom requires one to

have a soul, for it resides as much in the heart as in the mind. And a soul is something machines

will never possess (or perhaps I should reword that to say, a soul is something that, in general, will

never possess a machine).

Personally I contend that the sequence is a bit less involved than described by Ackoff. The

following diagram represents the transitions from data, to information, to knowledge, and finally to

wisdom, and it is understanding that support the transition from each stage to the next.

Understanding is not a separate level of its own.

Data represents a fact or statement of event without relation to other things.

Ex: It is raining.

Information embodies the understanding of a relationship of some sort, possibly cause and effect.

Ex: The temperature dropped 15 degrees and then it started raining.

Knowledge represents a pattern that connects and generally provides a high level of predictability as

to what is described or what will happen next.

Ex: If the humidity is very high and the temperature drops substantially the atmospheres is often

unlikely to be able to hold the moisture so it rains.

Wisdom embodies more of an understanding of fundamental principles embodied within the

knowledge that are essentially the basis for the knowledge being what it is. Wisdom is essentially

systemic.

Ex: It rains because it rains. And this encompasses an understanding of all the interactions that

happen between raining, evaporation, air currents, temperature gradients, changes, and raining.

Yet, there is still a question regarding when is a pattern knowledge and when is it noise. Consider

the following:

- Abugt dbesbt regtc uatn s uitrzt.

- ubtxte pstye ysote anet sser extess

- ibxtedstes bet3 ibtes otesb tapbesct ehracts

      It is quite likely this sequence represents 100% novelty, which means it's equivalent to noise. There

is no foundation for you to connect with the pattern, yet to me the statements are quite meaningful

as I understand the translation with reveals they are in fact Newton's 3 laws of motion. Is something

knowledge if you can't understand it?

Now consider the following:

- I have a box.

- The box is 3' wide, 3' deep, and 6' high.

- The box is very heavy.

- The box has a door on the front of it.

- When I open the box it has food in it.

- It is colder inside the box than it is outside.

- You usually find the box in the kitchen.

- There is a smaller compartment inside the box with ice in it.

- When you open the door the light comes on.

- When you move this box you usually find lots of dirt underneath it.

- Junk has a real habit of collecting on top of this box.

What is it?

A refrigerator. You knew that, right? At some point in the sequence you connected with the pattern

and understood it was a description of a refrigerator. From that point on each statement only added

confirmation to your understanding.

If you lived in a society that had never seen a refrigerator you might still be scratching your head as

to what the sequence of statements referred to.

Also, realize that I could have provided you with the above statements in any order and still at some

point the pattern would have connected. When the pattern connected the sequence of statements

represented knowledge to you. To me all the statements convey nothing as they are simply 100%

confirmation of what I already knew as I knew what I was describing even before I started.

References:

- Ackoff, R. L., "From Data to Wisdom", Journal of Applies Systems Analysis, Volume 16,

1989 p 3-9.

- Gadomski, Adam Maria, Information, Preferences and Knowledge, An Interesting Evolution

in Thought

- Sharma, Nikhil, The Origin of the Data Information Knowledge Wisdom Hierarchy

Source: http://www.systems-thinking.org/dikw/dikw.htm