edited by Birger Hjørland and Claudio Gnoli


Eric Coates

by Keiichi Kawamura

Table of contents:
1. Professional career
2. Practical achievements
3. Indexing languages developed
4. Published works
5. Underlying principles
6. From indexing language to information language
7. Still unappreciated genius
Bibliography of Coates’ published works
References (excluding Coates’ works)

Describes the practical and theoretical achievements of Eric Coates, a British librarian and classificationist. Outlines his professional career and describes his practical achievements, including indexing languages developed by him. Lists and reviews his publications and discusses the theoretical principles underlying his works. Explains the significance of using the term information language instead of indexing language in his later years. Concludes that Coates was an unappreciated genius in the field of classification and indexing.

[top of entry]

1. Professional career

Eric James Coates (18th May 1916 - 5th December 2017) was one of the most prominent figures in the field of → classification and information retrieval and made important contributions in the application of theory to practice in the United Kingdom (UK) in the Twentieth century. He was also one of the original members of the Classification Research Group (CRG) formed in London in 1952, which was influenced by Ranganathan’s thought.

Figure 1: Eric Coates

Coates entered the library profession as a junior assistant in 1934 and embarked on a career in public libraries. His first appointment was at Merton and Morden public libraries (London) where he served from 1934 to 1940. Next, he served at Dagenham public libraries (London) from 1940 to 1941. In 1946, after World War II, he became a fellow of the Library Association and in the same year he became a cataloguer at Watford public libraries where he served until 1949.

The turning point of his career was his success in the 1949 selection process to appoint staff for the newly established British National Bibliography (BNB). BNB commenced its services in January 1950 under the editorship of Arthur James Wells (alias Jack Wells) who shortly became a founding member of the CRG. The first year of BNB operated with a staff of eight. Coates was one of the four qualified cataloguers who had been appointed late in autumn of 1949. At that time, he thought of himself as the possessor of some degree of expertise in cataloguing rather than classification. But after a few months at BNB he was appointed as head of the subject cataloguing side of the enterprise. The following are his professional career stages beginning with that turning point:

1950-1961  Chief Subject Cataloguer, BNB
1962-1976  Editor, British Technology Index
1977-1990  Rapporteur, FID/BSO Panel
1991-1992  Rapporteur, BSO Panel
1993-2000  Director, BSO Panel Ltd, UK

[top of entry]

2. Practical achievements

BNB was a classified bibliography designed primarily for systematic search of books, pamphlets and monographs published in the UK. The classification scheme employed at BNB was the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC). DDC matched up neither to the specificity required even at book level, nor to the need for a consistently ordered display of classified material. To mitigate this problem, BNB adopted Ranganathan’s method of facet analysis using the → PMEST formula. The superimposition of the facet formula on a non-faceted scheme of DDC was carried out without notation. BNB devised the symbol [1], the ordinal value of which was between 0 and 1, and additional faceted terms followed the symbol. The practice was called “verbal extensions”. An accumulation of faceted extensions was published by BNB (1963). The classified section of BNB was supplemented with a chain index originally devised by Ranganathan. BNB fully carried out Ranganathan’s idea, which had not previously been put into practice outside India (Wells 1957).

Coates (1960b) published a valuable book on subject catalogues entitled Subject Catalogues: Headings and Structure. While the ideas set out in the book were an outcome of the ten years’ experience with BNB and regular discussions at the CRG meetings, he put forth a new approach to alphabetical subject catalogues. The new approach comprised a set of syntactic rules based on Ranganathan’s facet analysis as further illuminated by Jason Farradane’s relational system. Coates presented a copy of the book to Ranganathan, who approved of it, overlooking its occasional heresies, but added the admonition, “One cannot teach by the printed word alone”. Just at that time, it was felt in the UK that there was a need for a technical indexing service. There had been two commercial efforts to provide such a service in the UK in the 1950s, both of which had failed. Coates did not shrink from the venture to put his idea into practice. He became the first editor of the British Technology Index (BTI) which was commenced by the Library Association (LA), London in February 1962.

BTI was a publishing venture of the LA in the 1960s. The LA granted Coates losses for three years. At the end of its first year, however, BTI had attained 1,030 subscriptions, which exceeded the proposed target. By the end of the third year, it was running at 1,410 subscriptions, which was around the break-even point. After that, BTI’s subscriptions increased steadily. At the end of the 1970s, the LA announced that the Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA) and BTI provided a large proportion of publishing income and that their continued growth and strength were of high priority.

When BTI’s subscriptions got nearer to the break-even point, Coates started two things. The first was computerization of BTI. BTI operated with a staff of seven: an editor/indexer, four indexers and two clerical workers mainly as typists. While maintaining a high standard of indexing, the production time of BTI was kept to a minimum. The time-lag between the original and its appearance in BTI was three to seven weeks, but this standard was very sensitive to minor staff emergencies. A computerization project for BTI was started late in 1965, but the project was terminated in May 1966 because the firm to which the work had been contracted had made no progress. Next, a firm engaged in computer typesetting was approached, but after preliminary study, they decided that they should decline a task of processing non-numerical data. In the summer of 1966, an offer was made from the University of Newcastle upon Tyne Computing Laboratory. Work started at the computer laboratory with the aid of a £4,900 grant from the UK OSTI in October 1966. The project leader was Coates. Programming for data processing was completed and tested about twelve months. The results of trials were incorporated in three of the monthly issues in the summer of 1967. The LA decided to adopt computerization, which came into effect with the April 1968 issue. However, plans for computer typesetting were postponed until a high-speed film-setter was developed in the UK, and it was first used for the July 1969 issue. The English Electric KDF9 computer generated a chain index of inversion “see” references from input subject headings, extracted relevant relational and synonym cross-references from a magnetic tape store, and produced a monthly updated authority file (Coates 1969c). No attempt was made to automate the indexing process based on human intellectual work. When BTI moved to a third generation computer in January 1972, the long-cherished author index was realized.

The second thing was Coates’ involvement in an international project to devise an Intermediate Lexicon (IL) to permit easy inter-conversion between controlled vocabulary lists, both alphabetical and classified, used for indexing literature in the field of documentation and library science. The project was called “Documentation of documentation”, which was initiated by the Groupe d’Étude sur l'Information Scientifique (GEIS), Marseilles, headed by Jean-Claude Gardin. Two international conferences were held in Marseilles, and Coates attended both as a representative of the CRG, supported first by Aslib and second by the LA. It was recognized that there were about thirty indexing systems for the field of documentation. One of them was the CRG’s Classification for Library Science that was published by Aslib in 1965 in only a provisional form, and Coates took it with him to the conferences. There were eight participants at the first conference held on 1-3 December 1965, which produced a list of twenty-five “groupes” or main divisions of the IL. The next step was to discover whether the draft scheme was consistent with schemes used in their home organizations, so that it would be practical and realistic to map from one to the other. The results were collated by the GEIS, and its outcome was revised and adjusted by fifteen participants at the second conference held on 15-18 January 1968. The IL was experimentally used for exchange of information between two centres in Marseilles and Frankfurt am Main. Some difficulties of inter-conversion were identified. The project report was published both in French and English in 1969, and the latter version entitled An Outline Intermediate Lexicon was authored by Coates with David Weeks who was an American collaborator.

BSO (Broad System of Ordering) was constructed at FID in association with UNESCO in the framework of the UNISIST programme and was intended as a switching mechanism for various indexing languages. The project started in 1973, and the first hard copy publication appeared in 1978. During this period, ten classificationists contributed towards the completion of BSO, of whom four were from the FID/CCC, four from the FID/CR and two co-opted. Coates was the latest member who was asked to join the project in a co-opted member capacity. However, as Geoffrey Arthur Lloyd who had been first rapporteur of the FID/BSO Panel from September 1974 to August 1977 persuaded Coates to take up the rapporteurship, it was largely thanks to Coates’ energy and expertise that the raw BSO draft was refined, completed, subjected to a field test in 1977 and finally published in 1978.

Following the publication of the BSO - Broad System of Ordering: Schedule and Index in 1978 and of The BSO Manual in 1979, the BSO Switching Test of 1981 and the BSO Referral Test of 1982/83 were carried out. Based largely upon the findings and experience of these field tests, revision of BSO was set forward. However, due to the financial crisis of FID and UNESCO, BSO lost support in 1990 and was two years later incorporated as the BSO Panel Ltd in the UK. The revised BSO in machine-readable form was released in 1991. While BSO had been developed in the framework of the UNISIST programme, the scheme did in many respects reflect the work of the CRG. In 2000, by the good offices of Ia McIlwaine, BSO came under the management of University College London’s School of Library, Archive and Information Studies (UCL/SLAIS, now the Department of Information Studies). They set up a website for BSO, which was prepared by Aida Slavic, and the machine-readable version of the BSO 4th revision has been made available free of charge (UCL/SLAIS 2000).

[top of entry]

3. Indexing languages developed

The grafting of a faceted structure onto a non-faceted classification by BNB was a decisive departure from previous subject cataloguing practice which had been regarded as a virtually intuitive art or craft. Communicable procedures became very important in operations requiring teams of classifiers or classification compilers. The following are indexing languages that Coates developed or played a major part in developing based on faceted classification principles:

1957  British Catalogue of Music Classification
1962  British Technology Index-type
1978  Broad System of Ordering, 3rd revision
1991  Broad System of Ordering, 4th revision
2012  BC2 Class C Chemistry

BNB started to issue the British Catalogue of Music (BCM) in May 1957. BCM was also a classified bibliography supplemented with a chain index as BNB was. The classification scheme used for BCM, i.e., the British Catalogue of Music Classification (BCMC), was published by BNB in 1960. This faceted classification was compiled by Coates as a result of a discussion with a small committee of music experts. The subject field of music required a variety of facets. Coates recognized ten facets in compiling BCMC. BCMC had an influence on other classification schemes, including DDC Class 780 Music. BCMC had another prominent feature for its → retroactive notation, which did not rely upon facet indicators. For a larger notational base than that of a decimal system, BCMC employed the Roman alphabets. The reversal of schedule and citation order was the actual practice of faceted classification. The combination of facets could be recognized without facet indicators by using a technique which apportioned part of the alphabet to serve as an invisible facet link indicator while reserving another part to accommodate enumerated topics. Music literature and scores were separated: A to BZ was for literature on music, and C to Z for scores. The notation KGHE/MDe meant “cantata for tenor solo with orchestra”. This resulted from the combination of the following four facets: De (cantata), E/M (choral works with orchestra, which was an expansion of E “choral works with accompaniment” by adding M “orchestral music”), GH (tenor) and K (vocal solos). The primary facet was the one with the notation which occurred latest in the alphabet. Other facets could be recognized without facet indicators because their notations occurred earlier in the alphabet than those of the facets that preceded them in the compound classmark. At the 1957 Dorking Conference in a paper entitled “Notation in Classification”, Coates demonstrated that there was a mutual constraint between notational hospitality and expressiveness. BCMC adopted hierarchically non-expressive notation. Accordingly, BCMC fulfilled all the three notational requirements: simplicity, brevity and hospitality. Though retroactive notation in itself is not new in the history of library classification, it is again used in the volumes of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification 2nd edition (BC2) which have so far appeared.

The indexing methodology of BTI was governed by the same rules as described in Coates’ 1960 book. In the book he suggested the significance order of categories of concepts: Thing-Material-Action-Property. Following subject analysis in his own words, the indexer analyzed the relation between categories of concepts and formulated the subject heading by reference to the BTI Relationship Table which was also carried in the introduction to annual volume. Subject terms in a syntactic citation string were connected by a small set of punctuation marks, each of which indicated the degree of conceptual closeness. For instance, the comma was used for generic relations, and the colon and the semicolon were used for syntactic relations. The subject heading Bridges, Arch; Steel : Widening meant “widening of arch-type bridges which were made of steel”. In this case Bridges, Arch (Thing specified by Property) was a subclass of Bridges, so that the relation between the first term and the two terms in conjunction was called generic (i.e., genus-species) or inclusion relation (A included A + B). The relation between steel bridges and bridges was an additional generic relation as Bridges; Steel (Thing specified by Material) was a subclass of Bridges (A included A + B). The relation between Bridges and Widening in the structure of Bridges : Widening (Thing and Action upon it) was a syntactic relation between concepts from the two facets. Cross-references were produced both from articulated subject headings by using chain procedure and from an authority file as mentioned earlier. The page layout of BTI interestingly exhibited a “block structure” of related subjects, which was quite helpful for broad searching. This kind of collocation was due to the logically articulated subject headings and to the underlying classificatory principle throughout the indexing procedure (Coates 1963d).

BSO incorporated many of the theoretical developments in information retrieval which emerged after World War II. The order of BSO main classes is more different from most conventional schemes than it appears. BSO is based primarily on the theory of → integrative levels. While there are some deviations from conventional practices, including the separation of religion from philosophy, careful arrangement of BSO main classes exhibits an interesting collocation. BSO is a discipline-oriented general scheme, but phenomena- or mission-oriented classes are in the sequence of main classes. In addition to these inherent phenomena classes, provision for accommodating works with all or many aspects of phenomena is made at the top of the schedules. The schedules of BSO are constructed by considering both facets and relations, which is reflected in two kinds of combination rules. The procedure for internal combination is a simple clerical one that links notations in reverse schedule order. For instance, the compound subject “satellite studies of solar phenomena” is expressed as the BSO notation 252,72,0,52,28. The notation is given by citing first the element given later in the schedule (i.e., 252,72 Sun and solar phenomena) followed by that given earlier (i.e., 252,28 Satellite astronomy), and by replacing the first digit of the second element (i.e., 2) with a regular linking symbol (,0,) between the two elements within the same subject field (i.e., 252 astronomy and astrophysics). External linkages that cross combination area boundaries require analysis of the relation of the link connecting the elements. For instance, the complex subject “sociology of education” is expressed as the BSO notation 460-535. The notation is given by citing first Application area (i.e., 460 education) followed by Aspect contributor (i.e., 535 sociology) with a regular linking symbol (-) between them. On the contrary, “education of sociology” is given the notation 535-460. In this case, again, Application area (i.e., 535 sociology) precedes Aspect contributor (i.e., 460 education). The relational formula for external combinations in BSO is “Recipient-Aspect contributor”. The former is the subject which ‘receives’ an action or effect, or is seen according to a particular viewpoint, or has a property attributed to it, and the latter is the subject which ‘contributes’ an aspect, approach or action. In BSO, combination area is equivalent to subject field. Within each subject field, the schedule details are arranged in a facet pattern, which is repetitive or isomorphic from subject field to subject field. This brings two kinds of advantages. The first is simplicity in dealing with subject matters, which minimizes the dilemmas of classifiers. The second is predictability for a new concept, which enables both system revisers and users in a broad sense to find a logically correct place.

Jack Mills (2004, 549) mentioned that BSO has been very influential in the development of BC2. The outline of BSO had some close similarities with that of BC2 (Coates 1995a). These fostered mutual cooperation between the two schemes, an example of which has been the arrangement by which the computer programs of BC2 were made available for use by BSO. Work on new BC2 schedules gradually dominated the CRG during the 1990s. In this respect, as the focus of BC2 has been on the sciences, Coates was a major player making use of his experience with BTI and with the development of BSO (McIlwaine and Broughton 2000). He collaborated on several of the BC2 volumes, including Class AY/B General Science and Physics, Class C Chemistry, and Class U/V Technology and Useful Arts. Class C was regarded as the most formidable one, and Class U/V, which is expected to be the largest one in BC2, has been awaiting the completion of the pure science classes.

[top of entry]

4. Published works

In addition to a bibliography of BSO (Kawamura 2011) and of BTI (Kawamura 2015), both of which are in classified order with every item having an English abstract, there is a classified bibliography of published works by Coates (Kawamura 2018b). He authored 102 published works, of which the number of books and independent reports was 11, journal articles and conference papers 67, book reviews 20, and memorial tributes 4. Without exception, every work requires careful reading. Even a letter to the editor was based on his profound practical theory. Book reviews mostly carried in the Journal of Documentation were all first-class. Key papers (Coates 1964b; 1973; 1978a; 1988a; 1988b; 1988c; 1997b) were particularly difficult but rewarding, as they developed and discussed the underlying principles described in section 5. It is worth mentioning that many of his works, including some key papers, were reprinted. For instance, in 1978 the Society of Indexers published Indexers on Indexing: A Selection of Articles Published in The Indexer as the twenty-first anniversary publication to mark the establishment of the society. The fifty-nine articles reprinted from issues of The Indexer were carefully chosen. A reviewer mentioned in the 1979 Journal of Documentation that it was particularly good to see the four papers by Coates chosen for inclusion that two of these articles were related to BTI and that each was still leading in its subject field. Besides these, other authors’ BTI-related articles were included. Coates has delivered occasional lectures on indexing and classification at workshops, seminars and courses held by Aslib, the LA, the Society of Indexers and library schools.

[top of entry]

5. Underlying principles

Coates advanced the theory of classification through the practice of BNB, BTI and BSO. We must explore the underlying principles common to these three systems. It is well known that in his teaching on classification Ranganathan emphasized the model of → a three-plane structure comprising the idea plane, the verbal plane and the notational plane. Coates recognized that the model abolished at a stroke the previous conventional wisdom that had completely separated alphabetical subject cataloguing from library classification. He restructured the three-plane model as the idea or concept plane and the symbol plane, the latter of which comprised the verbal or linguistic plane and the notational plane. The reduced model called attention to the unique place of natural language among symbol systems. Coates’ intention was to make us notice that a pitfall lurked in such well-known propositions as “Concept formation takes place only with the help of words and language”. While one cannot operate on the idea plane without calling up natural language in aid, there is an ever-present tendency for the symbol level to obscure the concepts that the symbols represent. Similarly, one cannot eliminate the forms of natural language from indexing language. Coates stresses that there is a one-to-one correlation between concept and symbol in classification. One can consign them to a relatively inconspicuous role, and Ranganathan carried this out in a very ingenious way. Thus, Coates concluded that Ranganathan arrived at his key proposition that all → knowledge organization systems, whatever their form, needed to be based and derived from a classification scheme.

Coates’ adherence to concept analysis bonded together classification. His practice and theory seem to be always based on a triad of the following principles:

  • the basic unity of subject indication;
  • relational analysis in the context of classification;
  • recourse to classification in any case.

The first principle that Coates recognized, and inherited from Ranganathan, but not Ranganathan’s own wording, embraces classification and subject indexing of all kinds. To put it simply, alphabetical subject indexing schemes possess, or should possess, some form of classificatory correlation. Coates recognized that Ranganathan’s contribution in the field of knowledge organization was principally of two kinds: the first was the notion of the basic unity of subject indication mentioned above, and the second was his exhaustive illumination of problems of classification syntactics using the notion of facets. However, he added that Ranganathan was a traditionalist with regard to classification semantics. The second principle is a region that no one else has ever explored, though relational analysis itself had been advocated by Farradane early in the 1950s. It is interesting to know that the BTI indexers were encouraged to deal with subject heading problems in classificatory terms. The wisdom of relational analysis was inherited by BSO, where the schedules were constructed by considering both facets and relations as mentioned in section 3. The third principle underlying throughout Coates’ 1960 book does indicate the need for a coherently structured new general classification reflecting a modern world view. He understood that classification was simply the ordering of terms into a systematic pattern of likeness of meaning, so that it functioned as the basis of vocabulary control. Likewise classification was or should be the basis for non-classificatory-form indexing languages. It is here that BSO and BC2, when completed, might well be used as a possible starting point model for use in in-depth research on classification semantics, including the problem of related terms.

[top of entry]

6. From indexing language to information language

In his key papers published in the late 1980s, Coates (1988a; 1988b; 1988c) started to use the term information language instead of indexing language. He did not strongly advocate the use of information language, so that the significance of the change in terminology has been overlooked. Coates (1988a) used the new term for presenting the following two propositions:

  • Information languages are the basis of all retrieval methods;
  • Classification is or should be the basis of information languages.

Of the two propositions, the second one was paraphrased by Coates (1988b) as “Classification as the basis for non-classificatory-form information languages”, which was based on the underlying principles discussed in the section 5. The first proposition implies that indexing languages are necessary not only for indexing and classifying documents but also for retrieving them. Without an indexing language, retrieval remains a simple matching of query words with words which happen to appear in documents. To cope with this kind of problem, thesauri have been used at the stage of the input of user queries to the retrieval system. But retrieval is more than matching of words or terms. In this respect faceted classification is the strongest of all kinds of indexing languages because it allows both syntactic and semantic relations of a subject to be expressed. Coates (1988c, 221-22) argued that the need for an indexing language in retrieval might arise as a result of:

  • a user's inability to formulate his requirement with complete precision;
  • his wish to retrieve exhaustively all the information relevant to his subject contained within the information store; or
  • the inherent complexity of the target subject itself.

Library and information science (LIS) is now faced with a paradigm shift caused by three factors: the increased accessibility of information sources embracing all fields of knowledge because of the development of the Internet; the popularization of online retrieval by users themselves; and the need for fewer classifiers than before owing to central classification services. At the sixth and last in the series of the FID/CR's International Study Conference on Classification Research (ISCCR), Coates (1997b) proposed that classification studies should be re-oriented to give greater emphasis to the role of classification as a search aid than to the role of classifying of documentary material. He also discussed the problem of teaching classification in view of the relatively small numbers of classifiers needed. He concluded that the main future endeavour in the field of classification should be directed to dissemination of understanding of the principles of classification to potential users in general education rather than to the further development of automatic or semi-automatic classification methods to aid subject searching.

The two propositions presented early in this section resolve another matter, concerned with the CRG declaration entitled “The need for a faceted classification as the basis of all methods of information retrieval”. The declaration was originally announced as a memorandum of the CRG (1955). While the memorandum set the keynote for the 1957 Dorking Conference, which was the first in the series of the ISCCR mentioned above and promoted further research and development of faceted classification, some of those who participated in the conference thought that the declaration was unfortunate because part of the title (“as the basis of”) was “exclusive”. To mitigate the exclusiveness, sometimes the definite article has been changed to the indefinite one (“as a basis of”). But this kind of mitigation was insufficient; a re-definition of the CRG declaration was needed. As one of the original members of the CRG and of the opinion that the declaration was exclusive, Coates carried out this duty. Accordingly the above two propositions should be regarded as a revision of the purport of the CRG declaration.

In the end Coates showed us two additional roles of classification: a search aid in retrieval and a teaching aid in general education. The first idea is based on an assumption that online retrieval by users themselves will be popularized still more and that an indexing language will become a useful tool for retrieval. The second idea may be traced back to Ranganathan (1957) who made a keynote address at the Dorking Conference entitled, “Library classification as a discipline”. Ranganathan argued that universities should maintain chairs and research fellowships in the discipline of library classification. To conclude, it can be said that the acquisition of an information language and of classification wisdom will improve each user’s effectiveness in retrieval in the age of an information- skilled society, where ability to come to terms with, and to navigate through, the diversity of knowledge fields would be an essential part of the required skills. In this respect, completely faceted new general classifications based on a modern world view, which also close the gap between classification theory and practice, are the most valuable instruments to fulfil the two roles of classification mentioned above.

[top of entry]

7. Still unappreciated genius

At the LA, Reference and Special Libraries Section, Technical Problems 1957 Conference held in April of 1957, Coates opened a discussion on classification problems. His lecture entitled “Indexing and Classification” was an analysis of the role of classification and drew attention to several of the problems arising out of the inability of the well-known general classifications to cater to the complexities of modern knowledge and the demands of modern library services. The discussion immediately showed a general dissatisfaction with the well-known schemes. The conference passed a resolution expressing this disapproval and asking the LA to initiate investigation into the possibility of making a new general classification scheme. At this point, the NATO report, Increasing the Effectiveness of Western Science, appeared in 1960. One of recommendations of the LA’s Library Research Committee was that a new scheme of classification of science and technology would be an important factor in achieving the desired end. The LA approached NATO. This led to the award of a £5,000 grant and allowed the LA to support the 1963 London Conference organized by the CRG. Coates (1964b) gave a paper at the conference, but he could not be concerned any more with a pilot study for a new general classification. Two other CRG members carried out the pilot study full-time in association with the BNB/MARC project, but in the event, no general classification emerged. If Coates had remained at BNB a further several years from 1961, a new general classification would have been realized. But conversely, it is doubtful whether we would have seen BTI, which has been praised as an indexing masterpiece in the field of science and technology edited by the genius of subject indexing.

BTI was a very early example of a concept-controlled subject retrieval system that computerized its clerical and typesetting operations in an integrated manner. In recognition of the success of BTI, the LA awarded Coates the title of Honorary Fellow in 1979. In 1998, Coates was acknowledged by the Conference on the History and Heritage of Science Information Systems as one of the Pioneers of Information Science and asked to prepare a brief account of a memorable moment in his career. Coates (1999) wrote the reminiscence of his first meeting with Ranganathan. It is regrettable that Coates was not recognized by Ranganathan-related commendations. It could be argued that it was Coates who should have first received the Ranganathan Award, which was established by the FID/CR in 1975.

Douglas Foskett (1979, 259) who has been in charge of publicity for the CRG remarked:

the Classification Research Group [...] has been the dominant influence on the theory and practice of classification and indexing: the BNB and BTI are eloquent witnesses.

Brian Vickery (2004, 13) in his reminiscences noted:

Eric Coates was working as a cataloguer and classifier at the then recently established British National Bibliography. Earnest, sometimes a little severe, transparently sincere and humane, Eric later became the first editor of the British Technology Index and wrote a book, Subject Catalogues: Headings and Structure, much influenced by facet ideas. He has also played a major part in constructing and testing the Broad System of Ordering, a high-level classification system.

Due to the decline of classification, Coates’ works have not been well understood and appreciated. Works achieved by a man of sharp insight into the crux of problems, the courage of standing up to problems now faced with, a strong will to achieve the target, a sense of responsibility and the capacity as a team leader are so great that they still remain to be rightly valued as a global standard for the future.

[top of entry]


The author is grateful to Paul Coates, the eldest son of Eric Coates, for supplying a photograph of his father. Sincere gratitude is due to Leonard Will, UK, for reading the manuscript as a native English speaker.


This article is based on Kawamura (2018a; 2018b).

[top of entry]

Bibliography of Coates’ published works

Coates, Eric James. 1951. “Central Cataloguing and Classification”. Library Association Record 53, no. 6: 205.

Coates, Eric James. 1953. “Alphabetical Subject Catalogues”. Journal of Documentation 9, no. 1: 58-63.

Coates, Eric James. 1954. “Classification in Reference Service”. Annals of Library Science 1, no. 3: 152-61.

Coates, Eric James. 1956a. “Summary on Notation”. Classification Research Group Bulletin no. 1: 13-14.

Coates, Eric James. 1956b. “Ordinal and Hierarchical Notation”. Classification Research Group Bulletin no. 1: 15-19.

Coates, Eric James. 1957a. “Notation in Classification”. Classification Research Group Bulletin no. 2: D1-D19.

Coates, Eric James. 1957b. “Notation in Classification”. In Proceedings of the International Study Conference on Classification for Information Retrieval held at Beatrice Webb House, Dorking, England, 13th-17th May 1957. London: Aslib and New York: Pergamon, 51-64.

Coates, Eric James. 1957c. “Indexing and Classification”. In Library Association. Reference and Special Libraries Section. Technical problems - 1957: Papers and Discussions of the Annual Conference, Harrogate, April 1957, ed. H. Smith and H.G. German. London: Library Association, 13-26 (includes discussion, 22-26).

Coates, Eric James. 1957d. “The Use of B.N.B. in Dictionary Cataloguing”. Library Association Record 59, no. 6: 197-202.

Coates, Eric James. 1958. Review of: Classification in Theory and Practice: a Collection of Papers, by Thelma Eaton. Champaign, IL: Illini Union Bookstore, 1957, 62p. Journal of Documentation 14, no. 1: 19.

Coates, Eric James. 1959. “The Dewey Decimal Classification, Edition 16”. Library Association Record 61, no. 8: 187-90.

Coates, Eric James. 1960a. “The Decimal Classification, Edition 16: Class 300”. Library Association Record 62, no. 3: 84-90.

Coates, Eric James. 1960b. Subject Catalogues: Headings and Structure. London: Library Association. Reprinted in 1963 and 1969, and reissued with the new eight-page preface in 1988.

Coates, Eric James. 1960c. The British Catalogue of Music Classification. London: Council of the British National Bibliography. Classification scheme.

Coates, Eric James. 1960d. Review of: Cataloging and Classification, by Maurice F. Tauber. New Brunswick, NJ: Graduate School of Library Service, Rutgers State University, 1960, 271p. and Subject Headings, by Carlyle J. Frarey. New Brunswick, NJ: Graduate School of Library Service, Rutgers State University, 1960, 92p. Journal of Documentation 16, no. 4: 207-8.

Coates, Eric James. 1961. “The British Catalogue of Music Classification”. In Music Libraries and Instruments: Papers Read at the Joint Congress of the International Association of Music Libraries and the Galpin Society, Cambridge, 1959, ed. Unity Sherrington and Guy Oldham. Hinrichsen’s Music Book, 11. London: Hinrichsen, 156-65.

Coates, Eric James. 1962a. “British Technology Index”. Library Journal 87, no. 13: 2482-84. With a portrait of the author.

Coates, Eric James. 1962b. “Monitoring Current Technical Information with the British Technology Index”. Aslib Proceedings 14, no. 12: 426-37 (includes discussion, 437).

Coates, Eric James. 1963a. “Monitoring Current Technical Information [Letter]”. Aslib Proceedings 15, no. 4: 131.

Coates, Eric James. 1963b. “Monitoring Current Technical Information [Letter]”. Aslib Proceedings 15, no. 8: 243.

Coates, Eric James. 1963c. “Introduction”. In British Technology Index. Annual Volume 1962. London: Library Association, v-ix.

Coates, Eric James. 1963d. “Aims and Methods of the British Technology Index”. Indexer 3, no. 4: 146-52. Reprinted in Indexers on Indexing: A Selection of Articles Published in The Indexer, ed. Leonard Montague Harrod. New York; London: Bowker, 1978, 240-46.

Coates, Eric James. 1963e. Review of: Practical Cataloguing, by Albert Frederick Johnson. London: Association of Assistant Librarians, 1962, 116p. Library Review no. 145: 50-51.

Coates, Eric James. 1963f. “The Editor Comments [Letter]”. Library Association Record 65, no. 6: 228-29. In reply to an evaluation of BTI, it was argued that the suggestion for more coverage and more frequent publication did require further cost.

Coates, Eric James. 1963g. “British Technology Index [Letter]”. Library Association Record 65, no. 8: 310.

Coates, Eric James. 1963h. “British Technology Index [Letter]”. Library Association Record 65, no. 11: 433.

Coates, Eric James. 1964a. “British Technology Index [Letter]”. Library Association Record 66, no. 1: 38.

Coates, Eric James. 1964b. “CRG Proposals for a New General Classification”. In Some Problems of a General Classification Scheme: Report of a Conference held in London, June 1963. London: Library Association, 38-45. Reprinted in Classification and Information Control: Papers Representing the Work of the Classification Research Group during 1960-1968. London: Library Association, 1969, 19-22.

Coates, Eric James. 1964c. “Chain Procedure: Application in the British Technology Index”. Electro-Technology (Bangalore) 8, Special documentation issue: 33-39.

Coates, Eric James. 1965a.“Bibliographical Indexes”. In Computer Typesetting Conference, London University, July 1964: Report of Proceedings. London: Institute of Printing, 44-49.

Coates, Eric James. 1965b. “Rapporteur’s Opening Remarks” and “Rapporteur’s Summing-up” of Phyllis A. Richmond’s paper entitled “Contribution toward a New Generalized Theory of Classification”. In Classification Research: Proceedings of the Second International Study Conference held at Hotel Prins Hamlet, Elsinore, Denmark, 14th to 18th September 1964, ed. Pauline Atherton. FID Publication, 370. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 55-59 and 63-64.

Coates, Eric James. 1965c. “Classification Scheme of the British Catalogue of Music”. In Library Science Today: Ranganathan Festschrift, vol.1: Papers Contributed on the 71st Birthday of Dr. S.R. Ranganathan (12 August 1962), ed. P.N. Kaula. London: Asia Publishing House, 135-38.

Coates, Eric James. 1965d. Review of: Classified Catalogue Code with Additional Rules for Dictionary Catalogue Code, 5th ed. by S.R. Ranganathan assisted by A. Neelameghan. London: Asia Publishing House, 1964, 644p. Revue Internationale de la Documentation 32, no. 4: 157.

Coates, Eric James. 1966a. “Scientific and Technical Indexing”. Indexer 5, no. 1: 27-34. Reprinted in Training in Indexing: A Course of the Society of Indexers, ed. G. Norman Knight. Cambridge, MA: The M.I.T. Press, 1969, 128-41. Reprinted further in Indexers on Indexing: A Selection of Articles Published in The Indexer, ed. Leonard Montague Harrod. New York; London: Bowker, 1978, 219-25.

Coates, Eric James. 1966b. Review of: Alphabetical Subject Indication of Information, by John Wallace Metcalfe. New Brunswick, NJ: Graduate School of Library Service, Rutgers State University, 1965, 148p. Journal of Documentation 22, no. 1: 61-63.

Coates, Eric James. 1966c. Review of: Faceted Classification Schemes, by B.C. Vickery. New Brunswick, NJ: Graduate School of Library Service, Rutgers State University, 1966, 115p. Journal of Documentation 22, no. 3: 251-52.

Coates, Eric James. 1967a. Review of: General Subject-Indexes since 1548, by A. Taylor. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1966, 336p. Journal of Documentation 23, no. 4: 342.

Coates, Eric James. 1967b. “Control of Vocabulary in a Current Awareness Service”. In Proceedings of Small Meeting of Czechoslovak and British Information Specialists, Liblice, May 16-21, 1966. Prague: Centre for Scientific, Technical and Economic Information, 68-74.

Coates, Eric James and I. Nicholson. 1967c. “British Technology Index: A Study of the Application of Computer Processing to Index Production”. In Organization and Handling of Bibliographic Records by Computer: Proceedings of a Conference held in Newcastle upon Tyne, July 1967, ed. N.S.M. Cox and M.W. Grose. Newcastle upon Tyne: Oriel Press, 168-78 (includes discussion, 178).

Coates, Eric James. 1968a. “Computer Assistance in the Production of BTI”. Library Association Record 70, no. 10: 255-57.

Coates, Eric James. 1968b. “Computerisation of British Technology Index: Man-Machine Collaboration in the Production of Indexes”. INSPEL 3, nos.3/4: 147-63. Reprinted in Special Libraries - Worldwide: a Collection of Papers, ed. Reichardt Günther. IFLA publications, 1. Pullach im Isartal: Verlag Dokumentation, 1974, 293-310.

Coates, Eric James. 1968c. “The Computerisation of the British Technology Index”. In Computer Based Information Retrieval Systems, ed. Bernard Houghton. London: Clive Bingley, 45-63 (includes discussion, 61-63).

Coates, Eric James. 1968d. “Report on 1st Six Months’ Production Operational Use of Computer Assembly of Cross Reference Data and Compilation of Authority File”. Three-page insertion as supplement to: Nicholson, I. 1968. A Project to Study the Feasibility of the Production of the British Technology Index by Computer. Final Report May 1968. OSTI Report, 5029. Newcastle upon Tyne: University of Newcastle upon Tyne Computing Laboratory.

Coates, Eric James. 1968e. “Intermediate Lexicon for Documentation”. Classification Research Group Bulletin no. 9. In Journal of Documentation 24, no. 4: 292-95.

Coates. Eric James. 1968f. “Library Science and Documentation Literature: a New Development in International Co-operation”. Library Association Record 70, no. 7: 178-79.

Coates, Eric James and David C. Weeks. 1969a. An Outline Intermediate Lexicon to Assist Interconversion between Terms Used in Various Indexing Languages in the Field of Scientific and Technical Information Processing. English version. Originally compiled by an International Working Party convened by the Groupe d’Etude sur l’Information Scientifique, Marseilles and Paris, January 1968. Washington, D.C.: George Washington University Medical Center, Biological Sciences Communication Project.

Coates, Eric James. 1969b. “Computer Handling of Social Science Terms and Their Relationships”. In EUDISED: European Documentation and Information System for Education. Volume III, Technical Studies. ERIC Report, ED 040 726. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, Documentation Centre for Education in Europe, 52-83.

Coates, Eric James. 1969c. “Computerised Data Processing for British Technology Index”. Indexer 6, no. 3: 97-101. Reprinted in Indexers on Indexing: A Selection of Articles Published in The Indexer, ed. Leonard Montague Harrod. New York; London: Bowker, 1978, 404-8.

Coates, Eric James. 1969d. “British Technology Index [Letter]”. Library Association Record 71, no. 8: 260. In reply to a criticism of BTI’s “see references” structure based on chain indexing, it was declared that BTI would never take the risk of deleting useful lead-in points.

Coates, Eric James. 1970a. “British Technology Index”. In Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, vol.3, ed. Allen Kent et al. New York: Marcel Dekker, 327-41.

Coates, Eric James. 1970b. “Switching Languages for Indexing”. Journal of Documentation 26, no. 2: 102-10.

Coates, Eric James. 1970c. Review of: Towards a Theory for UDC: Essays Aimed at Structural Understanding and Operational Improvement, by Jean M. Perreault. London: Clive Bingley, 1969, 241p. and An Introduction to UDC: a Programmed Text, by Jean M. Perreault. London: Clive Bingley, 1969, 111p. Journal of Documentation 26, no. 2: 181-82.

Coates, Eric James. 1971a. Review of: Your Jazz Collection, by Derek Langridge. London: Clive Bingley, 1970, 162p. Journal of Documentation 27, no. 2: 159-60.

Coates, Eric James. 1971b. Review of: Subject Analysis: Computer Implications of Rigorous Definition, by Jessica Lee Harris. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1970, 279p. Journal of Documentation 27, no. 4: 314-16.

Coates, Eric James. 1973. “Some Properties of Relationships in the Structure of Indexing Languages”. Journal of Documentation 29, no. 4: 390-404.

Coates, Eric James. 1974a. Review of: A Compressed Term Index Language for Library and Information Science, comp. by Alan Gilchrist and Kathleen Gaster with amendments by E. Michael Keen and Jeremy A. Digger. London: Aslib, 1973, 123p. Journal of Documentation 30, no. 4: 442-44.

Coates, Eric James. 1974b. Review of: Computer-Based Reference Service, by M.L. Mathies and Peter G. Watson. Chicago: American Library Association, 1973, 200p. Education Libraries Bulletin 17, no. 3: 29-30.

Coates, Eric James. 1974c. Review of: The Fabric of Knowledge: a Study of the Relations between Ideas, by John Lionel Jolley. London: Duckworth, 1973, 130p. Library Association Record 76, no. 2: 33.

Coates, Eric James. 1974d. “A Comment on “Technical Indexing at BTI””. Indexer 9, no. 2: 50-52.

Coates, Eric James. 1975. “Correspondence [Letter]”. Indexer 9, no. 3: 122. Argues that BTI started computer input from 1968 and computer typesetting with its July 1969 issue.

Coates, Eric James. 1976a. “Card Indexes or Printed Pages - Physical Substrates in Index Evaluation”. Indexer 10, no. 2: 60-68”. Reprinted in Indexers on Indexing: A Selection of Articles Published in The Indexer, ed. Leonard Montague Harrod. New York; London: Bowker, 1978, 128-36.

Coates, Eric James. 1976b. Review of: PRECIS: a Manual of Concept Analysis and Subject Indexing, by D. Austin. London: Council of the British National Bibliography, 1974, 551p. Journal of Documentation 32, no. 1: 85-96.

Coates, Eric James. 1976c. Review of: Information Retrieval, British and American, 1876-1976, by John Wallace Metcalfe. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1976, 243p. Library Association Record 78, no. 9: 450.

Coates, Eric James. 1976d. Review of: Organizing Resources: Six Case Studies: the Final Report of the Schools Council Resource Centre Project, by Norman W. Beswick. London: Heinemann Educational, 1975, 369p. Journal of Librarianship 8, no. 3: 215-18.

Coates, Eric James. 1976e. Review of: Terminology of Documentation. Terminologie de la Documentation. Terminologie der Dokumentation. Terminologiya v Oblasti Dokumentatsii. Terminologia de la Documentacion. A Selection of 1,200 Basic Terms in English, French, German, Russian and Spanish, comp. by Gernot Wersig and Ulrich Neveling. Paris: UNESCO, 1976, 274p. Journal of Documentation 32, no. 4: 327-29.

Coates, Eric James. 1977. Third European Congress on Information Systems and Networks: Overcoming the Language Barrier - Report, and Critical Appraisal of Some Interlingual Conversion Problems in Documentation. BLRD Report, 5380. London: British Library.

Coates, Eric James. 1978a. “Classification in Information Retrieval: the Twenty Years Following Dorking”. Journal of Documentation 34, no. 4: 288-99 (includes a tribute to Herbert Coblans, 288-89). Reprinted in From Classification to “Knowledge Organization”: Dorking Revisited or “Past is Prelude,” ed. Alan Gilchrist. FID Publication, 714. The Hague: FID, 1997, 11-20.

Coates, Eric, Geoffrey Lloyd and Dusan Simandl. 1978b. BSO - Broad System of Ordering: Schedule and Index, 3rd revision. FID Publication, 564. The Hague: FID and Paris: UNESCO. Classification scheme.

Coates, Eric, Geoffrey Lloyd and Dusan Simandl. 1979a. The BSO Manual: the Development, Rationale and Use of the Broad System of Ordering. FID Publication, 580. The Hague: FID.

Coates, Eric James. 1979b. “The Broad System of Ordering”. International Forum on Information and Documentation 4, no. 3: 3-6. Leading paper in a special issue devoted to BSO.

Coates, Eric James. 1980a. “A Future for BSO?” A talk given at the BSO Open Meeting, Lyngby, Denmark, 22nd August 1980. Unpublished eight-page document distributed to the attendees.

Coates, Eric James. 1980b. “The Broad System of Ordering (BSO)”. In New Trends in Documentation and Information: Proceedings of the 39th FID Congress, University of Edinburgh, 25-28 September 1978, ed. Peter J. Taylor. FID Publication, 566. London: Aslib, 259-73.

Coates, Eric James. 1980c. ““Founding Fathers” Were Right [Letter]”. Library Association Record 82, no. 10: 489. Critical comments on an announcement of the new title for BTI.

Coates, Eric James. 1981a. “Letter to the Editor”. International Classification 8, no. 1: 46. On behalf of the FID/BSO Panel, the author offered a counterargument against Ingetraut Dahlberg’s criticism of BSO.

Coates, Eric James. 1981b. “The Broad System of Ordering: the Compilers Reply to Their Critics”. International Forum on Information and Documentation 6, no. 1: 24-30.

Coates, Eric James, Geoffrey Arthur Lloyd and Dusan Simandl. 1981c. BSO as a Switching Mechanism: Test Exercise - Panel’s Report 1981.

Coates, Eric James. 1981d. “Subject Indication Relative to On-line Systems”. Scientia Yugoslavica 7, nos. 3/4: 167-75.

Coates, Eric James. 1981e. “The Broad System of Ordering: with Some Reference to Its Possible Use as a Referral Tool in Connection with On-line Systems”. Scientia Yugoslavica 7, nos. 3/4: 177-87.

Coates, Eric James. 1982. Review of: The Subject Approach to Information, 4th ed. by A.C. Foskett. London: Clive Bingley, 1982, 574p. Journal of Librarianship 14, no. 3: 221-24.

Coates, Eric James. 1983a. Review of: Research on Classification Systems: Summarizing Report on Research on Classification Systems and Their Application, by Ejnar Wåhlin. Bangalore: FID/CR Secretariat; Documentation Research and Training Centre, 1979, 129p. International Classification 10, no. 1: 41-42.

Coates, Eric James. 1983b. “FID/BSO Broad System of Ordering”. FID News Bulletin 33, no. 9: 68-69. Account of the BSO Referral Test carried out by University of London Central Information Service in 1982/83.

Coates, Eric James. 1984. “FID/BSO Panel - Broad System of Ordering”. FID News Bulletin 34, nos.11/12: 91. Report of Panel’s meetings following the BSO Referral Test.

Coates, Eric James, Geoffrey Arthur Lloyd, Dusan Simandl and John E. Linford. 1985a. BSO Referral Test: Panel’s Report 1983. FID Publication, 635. Published by FID/BSO Panel for FID and UNESCO.

Coates, Eric James, Geoffrey Arthur Lloyd, Dusan Simandl and John E. Linford. 1985b. BSO Referral Index: a Subject Index to 36 Data-Bases in the DIALOG System. FID Publication, 634. Published by FID/BSO Panel for FID and UNESCO.

Coates, Eric James. 1986a. “FID Broad System of Ordering Panel (FID/BSO): Looking Back 12 Years - and Forward”. International Forum on Information and Documentation 11, no. 3: 64-67.

Coates, Eric James. 1986b. “Tribute to Lawrie Ardern [Obituary]”. Library Association Record 88, no. 12: 584.

Coates, Eric James. 1987. “Lexical Tools for Information Exchange in a Mechanised Environment - Some Considerations Relating to the Broad System of Ordering”. In Information, Communications and Technology Transfer: Proceedings of the Forty-third FID Congress held in Montreal, Canada, 14-18 September 1986, ed. Elmer V. Smith and Stella Keenan. FID Publication, 663. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 461-67 (includes discussion, 467).

Coates, Eric James. 1988a. “Preface to 1988 Reissue”. In his Subject Catalogues: Headings and Structure, reissued ed. London: Library Association Publishing. Eight-page preface without pagination.

Coates, Eric James. 1988b. “Ranganathan’s Thought and its Significance for the Mechanisation of Information Storage and Retrieval”. In Relevance of Ranganathan’s Contributions to Library Science, ed. T.S. Rajagopalan. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House, 54-73. Reprinted in Herald of Library Science 27, nos. 1/2 (1988): 3-14.

Coates, Eric James. 1988c. “The Role of Classification in Information Retrieval: Action and Thought in the Contribution of Brian Vickery”. Journal of Documentation 44, no. 3: 216-25. Reprinted in Facets of Knowledge Organization: Proceedings of the ISKO UK Second Biennial Conference, 4th - 5th July 2011, London, ed. Alan Gilchrist and Judi Vernau. Bingley: Emerald, 2012, 191-202.

Coates, Eric James. 1990. “Broad System of Ordering”. FID News Bulletin 40, no. 9: 112. Report on the fact that FID has recently transferred its copyright of BSO to the members of the BSO Panel and that the revised and enlarged BSO will be available on floppy disc.

Coates, Eric James, John E. Linford, Geoffrey Arthur Lloyd and Sinisa Maricic. 1991a. BSO - Broad System of Ordering, 4th revision. Machine-readable version. St. Albans, UK: BSO Panel Ltd. Classification scheme. Updated in 1994 and since the summer of 2000 an updated version of the 4th revision has been made available from the website of University College London: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/fatks/bso.

Coates, Eric James. 1991b. “In Memoriam: Geoffrey Arthur Lloyd [Obituary]”. FID News Bulletin 41, no. 5: 83-84. With a portrait of the deceased. Reprinted without portrait in International Classification 18, no. 3 (1991): 166.

Coates, Eric James. 1995a. “BC2 and BSO: Presentation at the Thirty-Sixth Allerton Institute, 1994 Session on Preparing Traditional Classifications for the Future”. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 21, no. 2: 59-67.

Coates, Eric James. 1995b. “Allerton Institute 1994”. Bliss Classification Bulletin no. 37: 7-9.

Coates, Eric James. 1995c. Review of: The History of the British National Bibliography, 1950-1973, by Andy Stephens. Boston Spa: British Library National Bibliographic Services, 1994, 159p. Journal of Documentation 51, no. 1: 62-64.

Coates, Eric James. 1997a. “1957-1997 Plus Ça Change... What Has Happened to Classification since the Dorking Conference?” In From Classification to “Knowledge Organization”: Dorking Revisited or “Past is Prelude”, ed. Alan Gilchrist. FID Publication, 714. The Hague: FID, viii.

Coates, Eric James. 1997b. “Subject Searching of Large Scale Information Stores Embracing All Fields of Knowledge: Classification and Concept Matching”. In Knowledge Organization for Information Retrieval: Proceedings of the Sixth International Study Conference on Classification Research held at University College London, 16-18 June 1997. FID Publication, 716. The Hague: FID, 17-22.

Coates, Eric James. 1999. “Downsizing the Hunch Element in Subject Indication: My First Meeting with Ranganathan”. In Proceedings of the 1998 Conference on the History and Heritage of Science Information Systems, ed. Mary Ellen Bowden et al. Medford, NJ: Information Today, 258. With a portrait of the author. Previously available online in Pioneers of Information Science: Scrapbook. http://www.libsci.sc.edu/bob/ISP/scrapbook.htm. Now in Internet Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20070108111705/http://www.libsci.sc.edu:80/bob/isp/coates2.htm

Coates, Eric James. 2005a. “Kenneth Jay [Obituary]”. Library + Information Update 4, no. 3: 47.

Coates, Eric James. 2005b. “Eric Finerty [Obituary]”. Library + Information Update 4, no. 10: 45.

Mills, Jack, Vanda Broughton and Eric Coates. 2012. Bliss Bibliographic Classification, 2nd ed. Class C Chemistry. London: De Gruyter Saur. Classification scheme.

[top of entry]

References (excluding Coates’ works)

BNB. 1963. Supplementary Classification Schedules: Prepared to Augment the Dewey Decimal Classification for Use in the British National Bibliography and First Introduced in January 1960. London: Council of the British National Bibliography.

CRG 1955. “The need for a faceted classification as the basis of all methods of information retrieval”. Library Association Record 57, no.7: 1955, 262-68. Reprinted in Proceedings of the International Study Conference on Classification for Information Retrieval held at Beatrice Webb House, Dorking, England, 13th-17th May 1957. London: Aslib and New York: Pergamon, 1957, 137-47. Reprinted further in From classification to “Knowledge organization”: Dorking revisited or “Past is prelude”, ed. Alan Gilchrist. FID Publication, 714. The Hague, FID, 1997, 1-9.

Foskett, Douglas John. 1979. “Tribute to Bernard Palmer”. Library Association Record 81, no. 5: 258-59.

Kawamura, Keiichi, comp. 2011. BSO - Broad System of Ordering: an International Bibliography. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Campus Repository. http://hdl.handle.net/10150/129413.

Kawamura, Keiichi, comp. 2015. Bibliography of the British Technology Index. Tokyo: Jusonbo.

Kawamura, Keiichi. 2018a. “In Memoriam: Eric Coates, 1916-2017”. Knowledge Organization 45, no. 2: 97-102. DOI: 10.5771/0943-7444-2018-2-97.

Kawamura, Keiichi, comp. 2018b. “Bibliography of Published Works by Eric James Coates”. Knowledge Organization 45, no. 2: 103-7.DOI: 10.5771/0943-7444-2018-2-103.

McIlwaine, Ia Cecilia and Vanda Broughton. 2000. “The Classification Research Group - Then and Now”. Knowledge Organization 27, no. 4: 195-99.

Mills, Jack. 2004. “Faceted Classification and Logical Division in Information Retrieval”. Library Trends 52, no. 3: 541-70.

Ranganathan, S.R. 1957. “Library classification as a discipline”. In Proceedings of the International Study Conference on Classification for Information Retrieval held at Beatrice Webb House, Dorking, England, 13th-17th May 1957. London: Aslib and New York: Pergamon, 1957, 3-12.

UCL/SLAIS. 2000. BSO - Broad System of Ordering: a General, Faceted Classification Scheme for Information Exchange and Switching. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/fatks/bso.

Vickery, Brian. 2004. A Long Search for Information. Champaign, IL: Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Wells, Arthur James. 1957. “British National Bibliography”. Annals of Library Science 4, no. 3: 73-89.

[top of entry]


Visited Hit Counter by Digits times since 2018-08-30.

Version 1.0 published 2018-09-04
Version 2.0 published 2020-10-07: section 6 added; minor amendments
Article category: Biographical articles

©2018 ISKO. All rights reserved.