One alternative to LCSH is FAST [1]. It uses LCSH terms but breaks up
the pre-coordinated (and pretty much incomprehensible) strings into
separate subject statements. So something like:
Italy -- Art -- 18th century
Becomes
Italy
Art
18th century
As a *vocabulary* FAST is pretty extensive. And it's openly available,
AFAIK.
kc
[1]http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/fast/download.html
On 8/30/13 8:36 AM, Ross Singer wrote:
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
--
Karen Coyle
[email protected] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
