In message <[email protected]>, Karen Coyle <[email protected]> writes >Richard, I think what you say here is true for what in MARC are >subfields v, y, z, but possibly not for x. Also, you may need to make >different decisions based on the type of subject heading (topic v. >geographic, for example). Unfortunately, LCSH didn't retain subfield >coding, so I don't know how you do this when starting with LC's LCSH.
Thanks for the explanation. >OCLC took apart LCSH and called it FAST, although I believe they used >the actual headings in bibliographic records, not the entries in LCSH >(which are patterns for creating headings). [1] From the web site, FAST appears to have been somewhat neglected since about 2003. Is that a correct assumption? When you say LCSH headings are "patterns for creating headings", do you mean that the published 393,160 terms are just examples of practice, rather than being an authoritative set in their own right? If so, it seems odd to give each of them a persistent URL. >OL also took part the >subject headings, but also switched the comma delimited ones to >natural order (Cookery, French to French Cookery). There were also >other changes but I don't know off hand what they were. Are the OL subject headings available for download? I don't see them on the standard downloads page. Come to that, they don't appear to be offered as an option when users add or update tags in a book record. Surely you should be encouraging consistency by offering existing terms as a suggestion? >The reason I say that subfield x is an except is that subfield x is an >exception is because it often makes little sense outside of the >context of the main heading: > > Cooking, American -- Southern style > >The subfield x's tend to be adjectives associated with the main heading. I see: thanks. Richard >Quoting Richard Light <[email protected]>: > >> >> Hi, >> >> Having loaded the latest LCSH dump into my home-made "triple store", I >> was wondering about deconstructing the headings into their component >> parts, and making something like a SKOS ontology or Topic Map from them. >> Thus, for example, "Arts--Awards--United States" might become: >> >> <lcshConcept> >> <id>sh2002000283</id> >> <lang>en</lang> >> <heading> >> <value>Arts</value> >> </heading> >> <heading> >> <value>Awards</value> >> </heading> >> <heading> >> <value>United States</value> >> </heading> >> </lcshConcept> >> >> and "Compromise (Islamic law)": >> >> <lcshConcept> >> <id>sh85029458</id> >> <lang>en</lang> >> <heading> >> <value>Compromise</value> >> <scope>Islamic law</scope> >> </heading> >> </lcshConcept> >> >> Is this a reasonable interpretation of the semantics of "--" and "(...)" >> in LCSH? And hasn't someone else already done this sort of exercise - >> surely they must have? (My thinking is that LCSH headings are sort of a >> post-coordinate system, and the pre-coordinated components of headings >> might prove to be interesting and useful on their own account - not >> least for indexing Open Library materials.) >> >> Richard >> -- >> Richard Light >> _______________________________________________ >> Ol-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to >> [email protected] >> > > > -- Richard Light _______________________________________________ Ol-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to [email protected]
