User talk:Dcljr/LC

=Moved from Category talk:LC-K=

For the most part the division of classes chosen by the LOC does not serve our purposes well. Generally it chooses sub-classes based on countries, it would seem to work better for us if an article can be cross referenced by a country category from D, E or F, and one or more codes from this class K.

A quick evaluation suggests that only KB, for ecclesiastical law, and KZ, for international law, are likely to be retained.

This page proposes how the law category may be sub-divided. When this has been grasped linking these subdivisions to coded categories is only a mechanical exercise.

General group

 * Jurisprudence
 * History of law
 * Philosophy of law
 * Historical legal systems
 * Common law
 * Civil law
 * Administration of justice
 * Courts
 * Judges
 * Lawyers
 * Statutes
 * Case law
 * Supreme courts
 * Appelate courts
 * Trial courts
 * Constitutional law

Government group

 * Administrative law
 * Government administration
 * Military law
 * Emergency measures
 * Financial administration
 * Taxation law
 * Fiscal policy

Benefits group

 * Social legislation
 * Environmental law
 * Labour law
 * Social insurance
 * Welfare
 * Education
 * Science and the arts
 * Public health law
 * Medical legislation
 * Food and medical drugs
 * Product safety
 * Alcohol, Tobacco and recreational drugs
 * Veterinary law

Personal group

 * Law of persons
 * Family law
 * Succession and inheritance
 * Private law
 * Arbitration and mediation
 * Obligations
 * Torts
 * Personal contracts

Property group

 * Property
 * Ownership
 * Real estate
 * Corporations
 * Intellectual property law
 * Copyright law
 * Patent law
 * Trademark law
 * Commercial law
 * Commercial Contracts
 * Insurance law
 * Banking
 * Regulation of industry
 * Carriage of goods
 * Bankruptcy

Criminal group

 * Criminal law
 * Compensation of victims

Interjurisdictional group

 * International law
 * Comparative law
 * Conflict of laws
 * Maritime law

DK5 main categories of law
This is how the DK5 system divides the law top-level category:


 * 34. Law, justice and legislation (top-level category)
 * 34.1 International law
 * 34.2 Constitutional and administrative law
 * 34.3 Criminal law and criminology
 * 34.4 Military law
 * 34.5 Civil/private law
 * 34.6 Statutes, acts, regulations, Royal decrees, departmental orders, circulations etc. (collections and standalones)
 * 34.7 Administration of justice
 * 34.8 Roman law
 * 34.9 Canonical, Jewish and Islamic law

These categories are subdivided in the DK5 system, and some subdivision will probably be needed here as well. This is just a suggestion for primary division - more top-level entries can be made, or some entries can be split (the DK5 decimal classification system is limited to 10 entries per sub-level, but the LOC system is not). Christian S 12:56, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Having 26 subdivisions available is certainly an advantage for LOC. The similarities between DK5 and Dewey on this topic are notable; one was clearly influenced by the other. Eclecticology 09:11, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Looking at these propositions, and the general list of Dewey Decimal categories of law:


 * 340 Law
 * 341 International law
 * 342 Constitutional and administrative law
 * 343 Military, tax, trade, industrial law
 * 344 Social, labor, welfare and related law
 * 345 Criminal law
 * 346 Private law
 * 347 Civil procedure and courts
 * 348 Law (statutes), regulations, cases
 * 349 Law of specific jurisdictions and areas

It seems that the most appropriate way to create a category system would be (Freely amend as necessary):


 * LC-K (this would include discourses on justice and law in general, and philosophical works)
 * International Law (includes Maritime Law)
 * Statutes (This might cross-link to historical bi/multi-lateral documents. It probably would have multi-lateral statutes, especially UN-related ones as a separate undercategory)
 * Courts (The World Court and the new International Criminal Court founding documents?)
 * Case law (Cases in the above two courts)
 * Constitutional Law
 * Statutes (Cross-link to Constitutional Documents)
 * Courts (Supreme Court Documents around the world. Organized by nation.)
 * Case law (Supreme Court results go here. Organized by nation.)
 * Administrative Law
 * Statutes
 * Courts (?)
 * Case law
 * Criminal Law
 * Statutes (Many many of these. Probably just link to online repositories, except for sample texts like the Super-DMCA sample legislation)
 * Courts (Presumably local, state, and low-level federal courts)
 * Case law
 * Military Law
 * Statutes
 * Courts (?)
 * Case law
 * Tax Law
 * Statutes (Link to IRS Tax Code?)
 * Courts (?)
 * Case law (Scientology cases, among others...)
 * Commercial/Corporate/Industrial Law
 * Statutes
 * Case law
 * Intellectual Property Law
 * Statutes
 * Case law
 * Social Laws
 * Statutes
 * Courts (?)
 * Case law
 * Private/Family Law
 * Statutes
 * Courts (?)
 * Case law
 * Historical Law Systems
 * Roman Law
 * English Law (e.g. Magna Carta)
 * French Law (e.g. Louisiana-type law)
 * Canonical Law (Christian?)
 * Jewish Law
 * Islamic Law

Or something along those lines... -- Pipian 20:49, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * This looks like a good suggestion. "Canonical Law" should perhaps be renamed "Christian Law", as I believe this is what it means (correct me if I'm wrong). As to "Intellectual Property Law" vs. "Copyright Law" I don't know which name is best. Christian S 15:15, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * I hesitated to callit Christian Law as I wasn't sure that it was what it's known to be called. I chose Intellectual Property instead of Copyright to allow a greater amount of cases to be understood to be under that category (Trademarks, Patents) -- Pipian


 * Canonical Law is what is used in Danish, but, as English is only my second language, I'm not sure what the correct english term is - it could be either for all I know. Intellectual Property is fine with me. Christian S 17:30, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you for your suggestions. The English is usually "canon law" rather than "canonical law"; it broadly co-incides with "ecclesiastical law". One could also say "church law". This is the one area where I plan to retain the KB that is used by LOC. Eclecticology 09:11, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

=Moved from Category talk:LC-TB=

This category is reserved for material related to software engineering, computer programs and source code. Ideas about how these should be categorized are welcome. Eclecticology 23:14, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Here are some possible categorisations, none seem perfect as there is overlap.

By business field:
 * Management
 * Banking
 * Medical
 * Engineering
 * Scientific
 * Avionics
 * Ecommerce

By technology (part-taken from Reliable Software Technologies Lecture Notes):
 * Safety and Security - encryption, redundancy, hot-cold backups
 * Verification and Validation
 * Distributed Systems - multiple machines, networks
 * Real-Time Systems - time critical, time-budgetted
 * Compilers and Tools
 * Interfacing languages - Ada-C Ada-Java for example

-Wikibob 21:47, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Possible categorization for discussion
How's this idea? I'll leave it here for a while for people to make comments, note any major subjects I've missed, and so on. I'm assuming this category is meant for both source code (Source code) and writing about programming and software design. As it stands right now, this proposed categorization has a pronounced bias toward the art of programming, as opposed to management or UI design or tutorials on specific software; see below for a list of topics for which I realize I've left little room.

Notice that I didn't try to cover "medical algorithms" or "avionics algorithms" or "banking algorithms," since as far as I'm concerned those labels are meaningless. Algorithms to fuzzy-match DNA sequences will be found under "fuzzy string searching" in -TBO; path-planning algorithms will be found under -TBL; and compound-interest formulas will be found under -TBG.

In compiling this categorization, I've looked at List of algorithms and Source code.

LC-TB Computer Science and Software Engineering -TBA Comparative programming paradigms (OO, declarative, constraint-based) -TBB Comparative programming methodologies (Extreme Programming, team organization, literate programming, verification) -TBC Comparative programming languages (C, Java, Lisp) -TBD Comparative miscellany (HCI, buffer overflow prevention) E  -TBF  Software tools (wc, diff, indent) -TBG General idioms and practice programs (HAKMEM, "Hello world") -TBH Ciphers, cryptosystems, and hashes (TEA, RC4, MD5, CRC32) -TBI Compression algorithms (JPEG, gzip, MP3) -TBJ Graph algorithms (Dijkstra, Ford, A*) -TBK Number theory and discrete numeric algorithms (Euclid, primality testing, calculate pi) -TBL Optimization algorithms (simplex, genetic algorithms, TSP) -TBM General numeric algorithms (Newton-Raphson, matrix multiply, DSP) -TBN Probabilistic algorithms (Markov chains, Bayesian filters) -TBO Searching and sorting (KMP, Quicksort) -TBP Highly parallel computing algorithms -TBQ Quantum computing algorithms -TBR Distributed computing algorithms S  -TBT  Parsing (regular expressions, LALR) -TBU Compiler design and implementation (optimization, register assignment, stack management) -TBV 2D computational geometry and image processing (Canny edge detection, Bresenham's algorithm) -TBW 3D and higher-dimensional computational geometry (ray tracing, computer vision) X  -TBY  Web programming (HTML, Javascript, CSS) -TBZ TCP/IP and network programming (ping, Web proxy, sendmail)

Deficiencies:
 * Security idioms (buffer overflow prevention, file permissions) (could go in -TBD)
 * Category -TBF is just thrown in there as a repository for "textutils" and "binutils" that don't implement any specific well-known algorithm (e.g., wc). Is it even worth having this subcat? I, personally, would like to have a repository for the GNU sources (and others) as user-friendly as Wikisource, but I'm not sure the copyright mess would allow many existing tools to be added verbatim; someone would have to reimplement each GNU tool under the GFDL.
 * Similarly, -TBG is only there for historical reasons (Case conversion, Hello world, Easter day, Xor swap algorithm).
 * Tutorials on specific products and tools can go in -TBB or -TBD, but that's pretty vague.
 * Information on the history of computing has to go in -TBD also.
 * User interface design (could go in -TBD).
 * Testing and formal verification (could go in -TBB).
 * Database programming (the construction of interesting SQL queries, for example).
 * Operating-system programming (file systems, thread libraries).
 * Memory management algorithms (implementing malloc and free).
 * Garbage collection algorithms.


 * See also Wikisource talk:Source code. Perhaps Wikibooks would be a more appropriate source code repository; in addition, it might encourage people to write more explanation about the source code and how it works. One obvious disadvantage: Newcomers to Wikimedia will almost certainly try to find source code on Wikisource. --Quuxplusone 17:18, 26 July 2005 (UTC)