Re: Relevancy-ranking LCSH?

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle_at_nyob>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 17:46:18 -0800
To: NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu
Tim Spalding wrote:
> Two detailed replies.
>
> Karen,
>
>> Tim, in part I think at one point you confuse LCSH and LC
>> Classification. LC Classification shelves things in a single place; LCSH
>> allows multiple subject headings to be added to a record.
>
> While I appreciate your comments, I am quite sure I was not confusing
> them. The blog post explicitly contrasts shelf-order systems like LCC
> and Dewey (as used 99% of the time) with subject systems like LCSH
> which allows multiple headings per book.
Sorry, I misunderstood. I think it was your reference to "subject
classification" to which I applied a different definition. There's an
old debate in library catalogs about "classified catalogs" (those in
something like Dewey or LCC order) vs. "dictionary catalogs" (like those
using LCSH). In any case, we shouldn't be bound by shelf location for
EITHER, as Diane pointed out.

kc

--
-----------------------------------
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------
Received on Mon Feb 05 2007 - 19:43:15 EST