I think "salvage operation" accurately describes much of what we need to
do to make our metadata serve the functions that it needs to serve in
the contemporary environment. That's a good phrase. But that's where we
are.
Ed Jones wrote:
> Thanks, Jonathan. This is why I tend to view any use of LCSH in the context of the Semantic Web as something of a salvage operation.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Next generation catalogs for libraries [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Jonathan Rochkind
> Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 7:56 AM
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Subject: [NGC4LIB] LCSH as thesuarus (was Re: [NGC4LIB] FRBR WEMI and identifiers)
>
> On the subject of trying to use LCSH in a facetted environment, I highly
> recommend Kelley McGrath's examination and analysis of just that issue:
> http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/23
>
> Ed Jones wrote:
>
>> Sorry, Karen, I routinely clicked on "reply" without realizing it would only go to you. I'll get it right this time.
>>
>> I also wanted to touch on the fact that LCSH wasn't designed as a faceted scheme, so what we're really trying to do here is see how well subfield $a in MARC heading and reference fields serendipitously maps to what might be considered a "principal facet" in a faceted scheme. In my example below, the War of 1812 is represented in subfield $a of a UF reference, which could then be used as an anchor to identify this record (and the longer three-term heading) as representing a "candidate facet". (The battles of the War of 1812 are each represented in subfield $a of the heading field and so would qualify as "principal facets" in this thought experiment, so it's rather perverse if the selection criteria exclude the war of which they were a part.)
>>
>> I think including the UF references (when they consist of a single $a subfield) would capture many, if not most, of these situations.
>>
>> Ed
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Karen Coyle [mailto:kcoyle_at_kcoyle.net]
>> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 1:21 PM
>> To: Ed Jones
>> Subject: RE: [NGC4LIB] FRBR WEMI and identifiers
>>
>> Ed, are you suggesting that single-facet cross references be used?
>> That is an interesting idea. Presumably they would have the same
>> identifier, but wouldn't be the prefLabel. (But you didn't send this
>> to the list, it looks like -- can you do that?)
>>
>> kc
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Mon Nov 16 2009 - 11:33:41 EST