• Title/Summary/Keyword: Fundamental Canons

Search Result 2, Processing Time 0.017 seconds

Ranganathan의 문헌분류에 관한 규범적 원칙-특히 분류의 3단꼐와 분류규준을 중심으로 -

  • 오동근
    • Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society
    • /
    • v.21
    • /
    • pp.195-229
    • /
    • 1994
  • This article investigates the normative principles suggested by Rangannathan as the guiding principles for his theories, consisting of basic laws, fundamental laws, canons, principles and postulates. His five basic laws and five laws of library science are re-interpreted from the view point of library classification. And three planes of idea plane, verbal plane and notational plane, one of the core ideas in his analytico-synthetic theory of library classification, are analyzed. This article also suggests the demonstration model for this three planes using the ideas from chemistry ad chemical equation. In the last part, it analyzes the canons for library classification of three planes. These normative principles are basically guiding principles for so-called analytico-synthetic or faceted classification. But they can be a n.0, pplied to most of modern classification. But they can be a n.0, pplied to most of modern classification schemes, especially to semi-enumerative schemes including DDC, KDC, etc. so that they can improve the schemes. From this regard, these principles can also be helpful to the KDC, on the verge of the revision of its fourth edition.

  • PDF

A Comparative Analysis on the Codes of Ethics in Engineering Societies: The Cases of USA and Korea (공학단체의 윤리강령에 관한 비교분석: 미국과 한국의 사례를 중심으로)

  • Song, Sung-Soo
    • Journal of Engineering Education Research
    • /
    • v.11 no.3
    • /
    • pp.78-89
    • /
    • 2008
  • This paper analyses the codes of ethics of eight engineering societies in USA and Korea focusing on fundamental canons, and major findings are as follows. Firstly, engineering societies in Korea began to make a code of ethics recent1y. Secondly, codes of ethics in USA have similar contents by mutual learning contrary to Korean cases. Thirdly, some codes of ethics in Korea are very poor and their presence are not well perceived. Fourthly, codes of ethics in Korea don't cover comprehensively responsibility to the public, to employers or clients, and to the profession. Fifthly, engineering societies in USA hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public. Sixthly, new social issues including sustainable development are well discussed in the codes of ethics in USA.