Re: Are "good enough" standards ok?

From: Sperr, Edwin <sperr_at_nyob>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:43:01 -0400
To: NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu
It's worth noting that U of Penn (of "Penn Tags" fame) has a subject
browse tool up on their Online Books page:
http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/browse?type=subject

It does a nice job of leading you by the nose to broader and narrower
terms...

Ed
http://marginalist.blogsome.com/

-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
[mailto:NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of Houghton,Andrew
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 1:18 PM
To: NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Are "good enough" standards ok?

> From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
> [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Roger Fenton
> Sent: 27 June, 2006 11:02
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Are "good enough" standards ok?
>
> Another problem I have with current OPACs that when you click on a
> subject heading tracing, you only get items with exactly that heading.
> For example, you find an item on Rarotonga doing a title KW search,
> and it has the SH "Rarotonga (Cook Islands) -- Guidebooks". You click
> on that and just get those items. I'd like the facility to be able to
> go directly from that to all items with "Rarotonga" in their SHs:

It seems like just indexing subfield-a in the 1XX should be all that is
needed.  We have implemented what you suggested in recent a research
project.  It is convenient.  We had some difficulty figuring out what to
call it.  We ended up with the wording: "Search vocabulary for main
term".


Andy.
Received on Tue Jun 27 2006 - 14:58:43 EDT