Content deleted Content added
Line 14:
<blockquote>Cutter produced the best classification of the nineteenth century. While his system was less "scientific" than that of [[J. P. Lesley]], its other key features – notation, specificity, and versatility – make it deserving of the praise it has received.<ref>LaMontagne, Leo E. ''American Library Classification: With Special Reference to the Library of Congress''. Hamden, CT, Shoe String Press. 1961, p. 215</ref></blockquote>
Its top level divisions served as a basis for the [[Library of Congress classification]], which also took over some of its features.<ref>LaMontagne, Leo E. ''American Library Classification: With Special Reference to the Library of Congress''. Hamden, Connecticut, Shoe String Press. 1961, p. 226.</ref> It did not catch on as did Dewey's system because Cutter died before it was completely finished, making no provision for the kind of development necessary as the bounds of knowledge expanded and scholarly emphases changed throughout the twentieth century.<ref>https://journals.ala.org/index.php/lrts/article/view/5419/6654</ref>
==Structure of the Expansive Classification==
| |||