|
CONCLUSION
It
is obvious how law libraries in common law countries have taken into
account
local interest and needs when it comes to choosing a classification
scheme.
Since KF Modified was designed by Canadian academic librarians with an
eye for
constitutional law and Québec civil code, it remains the
dominant scheme in law
libraries in Canada. On the other
hand, in other countries and
places where the law of England
has had a strong influence such as Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Hong Kong, Moys classification
scheme is
usually employed to accommodate their needs.
In addition to geographic differences, KF Modified has shown to be most
likely to be used by smaller, corporate libraries covering a limited
number of
jurisdictions whereas Moys is used in major libraries in Australia
.
And
in terms of scheme updates, KF editorial board may be more responsive
to
suggestions from users and therefore updates are published
frequently.
This, however, may
not be the case with Moys. It is probably because larger
libraries can afford
full-time classifiers trained in Moys to adapt it to meet their special
requirements.
As long as both schemes cater to idiosyncrasies of local law practice
and
fulfill patrons’ needs, they will continue to stake their claim in law
libraries worldwide.
|
