Re: Video of "Think Different"

From: James Weinheimer <weinheimer.jim.l_at_nyob>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:45:51 +0100
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
On 19/11/2012 17:10, Karen Coyle wrote:
<snip>
> Jim, LCSH is not a classification. It isn't even a complete thesaurus.
> See:
>   http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1503445
> Simon Spero's work on LCSH.
>
> "Subject Headings" are not a classification. They are subject headings.
</snip>

I must disagree. The subject heading itself is a *label* for a concept
that defines a group of records. Classification determines how those
concepts are arranged for retrieval. The heading "Dogs" defines a
concept that has this label. All records with this concept are grouped
together by having this label. The task for the searcher who is
interested in "Dogs" is to find that concept. How can someone find that
concept?

It can be done through finding it alphabetically, so that "Dogs" is
found after "Dogrib mythology" as it is in the arrangement found in LC,
or it can be found through a classified arrangement, so that people find
it through going through "Life (Biology)" -- "Organisms" -- "Animals" --
"Domestic animals" -- "Dogs". This is one type of classified
arrangement, but another arrangement, more purely taxonomic, could be done.

This type of access is how it is done in many parts of the world. In the
US, Cutter et al. decided that their catalogs were not for scholars who
supposedly knew the classified arrangement but for the average person
who would look for "Dogs" under "D" and not under "Life (Biology)". This
is what makes a dictionary catalog what it is. Otherwise it is not a
dictionary catalog. In some parts of the world, you have to look under
"Life (Biology)" or its equivalent, to eventually find "Dogs". Lots (and
lots!) of catalogs have been made this way.

Subject headings are the labels that were originally typed at the top
(head) of the cards so that they could be found. Arranging those records
can be done in various ways. Still, a classified arrangement exists
still exists in our current system of authority records.

But I guess this knowledge is being lost.
-- 
*James Weinheimer* weinheimer.jim.l_at_gmail.com
*First Thus* http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/
*Cooperative Cataloging Rules*
http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/
*Cataloging Matters Podcasts*
http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html
Received on Mon Nov 19 2012 - 17:46:51 EST