Is this just about the phrase used? Should it say "See also" instead of "did you mean"? Or can anyone think of another phrase that could be used to label the (legitimately useful, I think?) functionality without being odd?
________________________________________
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries [NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Tim Spalding [tim_at_LIBRARYTHING.COM]
Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 2:27 AM
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Leveraging Authority Data in Keyword Searches
May I suggest there is something Orwellian about the phrase "did you
mean?" when applied to politically-charged terms? It suggests to me
not merely that resources can be found under a given heading, but that
the searcher's own term is invalid and wrong.
Many may feel comfortable delegitimizing "partial birth abortion" and
"socialized medicine" but—to take a few examples from Sanford
Berman—UFL still has two items with the LCSH "Yellow peril." 137 under
"Jewish Question" and 2 under "Catholics as Scientists."
So far, I haven't been able to make the catalog suggest I'm after
information on the Yellow Peril, though, and indeed when I search for
the phrase, it suggests I mean "Walleye (Fish)." Are you mining your
own subject headings or doing it against a list of currently-approved
ones?
Tim
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Simpson,Elizabeth Yager
<betsys_at_uflib.ufl.edu> wrote:
> The State University Libraries of Florida are using an Endeca catalog - http://uf.catalog.fcla.edu/uf.jsp . Recently, we implemented a "Did you mean ... " link for title, author and subject keyword searches. The system searches the user's term in the authority tables and if there's a cross-ref match, it displays a "Did you mean ... " for the authorized term. Instead of populating the user's search results with hits based on the authorized term, the system allows the user to click and do a new search if desired.
Received on Mon May 04 2009 - 08:56:24 EDT