NOTATIONAL SYMBOLS IN CLASSIFICATION: PART III: FURTHER COMPARISONS OF BREVITY

Abstract

In Part II of this series of papers (this Journal, vol. 12, no. 2,1956, pp. 73–87), I urged that to ‘obtain a quantitative understanding of the relationships between brevity of symbol and style of notation, it is necessary to construct a series of model notations in which only one feature is varied at a time’. I then compared the lengths of two styles of ordinal notation—‘enumerative’ notation such as that of Bliss or the U.D.C., which does not use distinctive main‐class symbols, and what I called ‘faceted’ notation such as that of Ranganathan, which does use such symbols. (I would now prefer to call the latter ‘labelled’ notation.)

Citation

VICKERY, B.C. (1957), "NOTATIONAL SYMBOLS IN CLASSIFICATION: PART III: FURTHER COMPARISONS OF BREVITY", Journal of Documentation, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 72-77. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb026242