Bill & Pookie wrote: > When I was in the stacks looking for books on chess, I was also near books > on backgammon and mah jong. So liked the way simular topics were neghbors > and could learn new stuff. The problem with any such system is that it has only one dimension of similarity. Most topics have several dimensions, and they get lost. You were looking a book about chess and other, similar table games are indeed similar. But you also could have looked for a book about chess strategy, and topics like martial arts (some good material about strategy), foreign politics (strategic planning is an important part of a good foreign policy), AI (research about formalizing strategic planning), chess programs (actual implementations of formal strategies), biographies of chess masters (which possibly contain some general information about strategy, especially when it's an autobiography) and other such quite interesting and similar topics would have been far, far away in the system. > Also at that time, considered the Dewey Decimal System to be universal. It's a bit more global than the World Series , but apparently not the only player in town outside the USA. See e.g. http://www.udcc.org/ Gerhard -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist