Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
I have approached my task of addressing you today with more than conventional diffidence. As an association of specialist librarians, you bring to the consideration of my paper a formidable array of subject specialization. The subject of my paper, too, is a scheme of classification for libraries and all scholarly uses, which bases its principal claim to consideration on the superior quality of its scholarship. Perhaps now you begin to perceive the nature of my dilemma. I am no scholar I am a plain and very undistinguished worker in a public library I wouldn't know the difference between the nomenclature of the physician and that of the gardener. In short, there seems no reason why I should be here at all, beyond the very inadequate one that I have conducted an intermittent correspondence over some twenty years with the author of the scheme, Henry Evelyn Bliss, of New York, and tried to assist him with some of the minor details of the scheme. But please realize that in the primary matter of justifying the scheme I am a broken reed you must judge the scheme from your own study of the schedules, not from my advocacy, which must necessarily be hopelessly inadequate and unfair to one of the great pioneer thinkers of our age.
Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives – Emerald Publishing
Published: Jan 1, 1950
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.