Re: The next generation of discovery tools (new LJ article)

There's a FAST sub-committee of an ALA group?

Is there any way for anyone who isn't OCLC to use FAST _right now_ --- 
like, is there freely available software to translate LCSH to FAST?  My 
impression was that the only such software that exists is owned and not 
shared by OCLC.  So the only real way to use FAST in real world 
environments (as supposed to, say, deciding to do original cataloging 
with it, which we wont' do because it's not the 'standard') is to use 
OCLC services.

I am getting a bit frustrated about this, because I feel like I'm in 
some ways _duplicating_ FAST in my attempt to make LCSH work well in a 
"facetted" interface, duplicating work already done way better than I am 
by FAST. But there aren't any free tools to convert LCSH to FAST 
available, and not very good documentation on FAST in general.

Or even any free tools to consult FAST 'authority' files, to see what 
the FAST headings _are_.  All I can find is vague hand-waving describing 
the general intentions of FAST, but no actual specifics I could _use_ in 
an actual project I'm working on without spending months getting up to 
speed or rewriting software OCLC's already done better.

Anything I'm missing?


On 3/31/2011 9:46 AM, Lundgren,Jimmie Harrell wrote:
> Here I'd like to mention that we need not rely entirely on reasonable speculations. There is some data available showing what users have chosen to use as facet limits. One observation I had made from Josh Greben's statistics he made available online previously on Mango in Florida is that users like to limit by the genre/form facet. It was almost decided not to include that facet and some systems leave it out, but I'm really glad it was kept here.
>
> The use of this facet, (which in Mango we derive from both subject form subfields (6xx subfield v) and genre/form (655) fields), will be better fed by the increasing use of 655 as LC develops the LC Genre/Form Thesaurus further. I think this is one example of more data like Karen demands, and it will be fruitful to look for other possibilities.
>
> I can't miss the opportunity to mention that there is a newly formed ALCTS Faceted Subject Access Interest Group that born from the FAST Subcommittee.
>
> Thanks and have a great day,
> Jimmie
>
> Jimmie Lundgren
> Associate Chair&  Contributed Cataloging Unit Head
> Cataloging&  Metadata Dept.
> Smathers Library
> PO Box 117004
> University of Florida
> Gainesville, FL 32611-7004
> 352-273-2725
> 352-392-7365 (fax)
> jimlund_at_ufl.edu
>   
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Next generation catalogs for libraries [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Stephen Paling
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 9:41 PM
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] The next generation of discovery tools (new LJ article)
>
>> One of the issues is that we are working with the facets we have
>> rather than the facets that would be most useful. (Oh shades of
>> Rumsfeld!) There may be somewhere an analysis of what facets we would
>> LIKE to have...
> I agree with the general gist of what Karen said, but I also feel it's important to register an important disagreement. We should be thinking in terms of the metadata that USERS need, not what WE would like to have. One of the reasons that cataloging has landed in such a pickle is that we have very little basic research about what metadata will serve users best in different contexts. Sometimes I get the sense that a lot of people find it much easier to tinker around with existing systems rather than asking whether the systems are workable in the first place.
>
> Steve
>
> =====================================
> Stephen Paling
> Assistant Professor
> School of Library and Information Studies
> 4251 Helen C. White Hall
> 600 N. Park St.
> Madison, WI 53706-1403
> Phone: (608) 263-2944
> Fax: (608) 263-4849
> paling_at_wisc.edu
>