I think the argument is that "librarians think in LCSH/academics think in discipline-specific vocabularies".
How many medical collections use LCSH over MeSH, for example? -Ross. On Aug 30, 2013, at 11:24 AM, Shaun Ellis <[email protected]> wrote: > Mike, what do you mean when you say "don't think in terms of LCSH"? Is there > some other vocabulary that they think in? If LCSH is the best option, the > right interface may help them "think in terms of LCSH". For example, > auto-completion/suggestion of headings when tagging or searching might be > necessary. > > -Shaun > > On 8/30/13 10:05 AM, Michael J. Giarlo wrote: >> We are using LCSH in our repository, but it hasn't been very widely used >> because our users, largely research faculty and staff, don't think in terms >> of LCSH. >> >> -Mike >> On Aug 30, 2013 9:28 AM, "Matthew Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hello Code4Libbers, >>> >>> I am working on cleaning up our institutional repository, and one of the >>> big areas of improvement needed is the list of terms from the subject >>> fields. It is messy and I want to take the subject terms and place them >>> into a much better order. I was contemplating using Library of Congress >>> Subject Headings, but I wanted to see what others have done in this area to >>> see if there is another good controlled vocabulary that could work better. >>> Any insight is welcome. Thanks for your time everyone. >>> >>> Matt Sherman >>> Digital Content Librarian >>> University of Bridgeport >>>
