长时期内,我国档案分类的理论与实践,对职能分类的地位和作用未予以重视,探索较少。有鉴于此,笔者略呈管见,供档案界同仁思考。一、职能分类被忽视的原因建国以来,档案分类的理论与实践,文书档案(党政档案或称管理性档案)的分类,强调以保持来源联系为首要联系,来源原则居统治地位。科技档案分类强调以内容联系作为整理的依据,事由原则居统治地位。档案分类理论研究中,通常将职能原则纳入事由原则范畴,比较注意职能原则与事由原则的联系。二者都是把档案按业务范围归纳为若干类别,然后把档案归入各类之中,因而把职能原则与事由原则等同起来,以职能原则有悖于来源原则而受到冷遇。其实,职能原则运用于档案整理工作中,从实践考察,向来是以一个机关、社会组织的档案为对象按其职能活动设类,是一个全宗(或衙署)内档案的分类。它是在尊重全宗的前提下建立分类体系,是分类的细化与完善,并不违反来源原 In the long term, the theory and practice of archives classification in our country have not paid much attention to the status and function of functional classification and have been explored less. In view of this, I slightly overlooked for my colleagues in the file industry thinking. First, the reasons for the neglected functional classification Since the founding of the People’s Republic, the theory and practice of archives classification, classification of clerical and archives (party and government archives or administrative archives), emphasizing the primary link in maintaining source links and the dominance of the source principle. The classification of science and technology files emphasizes the content connection as the basis for collation, with the principle of dominance. In the research of archives classification theory, functional principle is usually included in the principle of cause, and more attention is paid to the relationship between functional principle and principle of cause. Both are based on the scope of the archive into a number of categories, and then classified the files into various categories, so the functional principle and the principle of equating the principle of functioning contrary to the principle of source and received a cold case. In fact, the principle of function is applied to the work of archival filing. From practical inspection, it has always been based on the functions and activities of archives of an organ and social organization. It is a classification of archives in the Fontantary (or Yatsu). It is based on the premise of respecting the Fonds classification system is the classification and refinement, does not violate the original source