Classifying Web Sites -Reply

[Dan Lester]

      Date:  06/13/1996  04:25 pm  (Thursday)  
      From:  Dan Lester
        To:  smtp("NDGMTLCD at gslis.lan.mcgill.ca")
   Subject:  Re: Classifying Web Sites -Reply

>>> Alain Vaillancourt
<NDGMTLCD at gslis.lan.mcgill.ca> 06/05/96
03:24pm >>>
Of course, the ideal would be to develop a true
hierarchical  classification system for web pages.
Yahoo has the beginnings of such  a system by its
hierarchy, but it does not have the other essential 
components of a system (such as a notation
sub-system) and of course,  the basic elements of
its hierarchy are severely flawed, 
----------------------------
A couple of objections to the above.  First, Yahoo!
DOES have a notation system.  It isn't a relatively
concise notation system like Dewey, LC, or
Ranganathan, but it IS a notation system.  Also, I'm
sure there is a "briefer notation" behind the visible
notation system that is displayed at each level.  I'm
not particularly fond of the basics of Yahoo!'s
hierarchy, but it is no worse than those of LC or
Dewey.  Each has its better and worse areas.  And,
even if a new and "ideal" system were developed,
it would also be outdated in a few years or
decades.  Finally, one of the benefits of the Yahoo!
system is the "interlinked" or "internested" nature of
it.  This gives some of the benefits of
Ranganathan's faceted classification, and if nothing
else gives multiple entry points to the same record
when searching by hierarchy, something that does
not exist in any book classification system widely
used in the US.

dan


Dan Lester, Network Information Coordinator
Boise State University Library, Boise, Idaho, 83725
USA
voice: 208-385-1235   fax:  208-385-1394
dlester at bsu.idbsu.edu     OR   
alileste at idbsu.idbsu.edu
Cyclops' Internet Toolbox:    http://cyclops.idbsu.edu
"How can one fool make another wise?"   Kansas,
1979.