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
Hi Matt,
It depends on the subject area of your repository. There are dozens of
controlled vocabularies that exist (not including specific Enterprise
Content Management controlled vocabularies). If you can describe your
collection, people might be able to advise you better.
Jacob Ratliff
Sorry, I probably should have provided a bit more depth. It is a
University Institutional Repository so we have a rather varied collection
of materials from engineering to education to computer science to
chiropractic to dental to some student theses and posters. So I guess I
need to find
That does help, thanks.
So, what you probably need to do then is take some time to strategically
think about what you want the controlled vocabularies to accomplish, and
what types of resources you have available to implement them.
How granular do you want to be in each subject area? (e.g. Do
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 matt.r.sher...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Code4Libbers,
I am working on cleaning up our
I'd hold off on AAT until the release of the Getty vocabularies as linked
open data in the near future. No sense in investing time to purchase or
otherwise harvest terms from the Getty's current framework when the
architecture is going to change very soon.
On a related note, the British Museum's
I see Ebsco uses Sears List of Subject Headings, I wonder if that would
work a bit better. Not sure if anyone has tried it though.
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Jing Wang jwan...@jhu.edu wrote:
That is the case with our faculty and staff here too. They don't use LCSH.
Is any library
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
That is the case with our faculty and staff here too. They don't use LCSH.
Is any library maintaining/develop local taxonomy/ontology for research
departments outside of library? Any tools or best practice you are willing to
share?
Thanks,
Jing
-Original Message-
From: Code for
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 sha...@princeton.edu wrote:
Mike, what do you mean when you say don't
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.
I am encountering more FAST users-- and I like them. Of course I fear the
OCLC hammer coming down and losing access but still trying to link its use to
our Repo project. Thanks for the encouragement
The other think-ins are say (old skool) Sears,
Genre-terms-of-erratic-ownership, MESH and -
Based on the pharmaceutical ads in their page sources and the fact that our
Cisco Iron Port has blacklisted them, I have to regretfully report that
marchive.com has been compromised. Does anyone know the relevant contact(s)
there to notify?
Sam Kome | Assistant Director, RD |The Claremont
Another way most taggers don't think in terms of LCSH is precoordinated
strings. Using FAST with auto suggest and complete might be something to
consider.
Sincerely,
David Bigwood
Lunar and Planetary Institute
Twitter: @Catalogablog
-Original Message-
From: Code for Libraries
Sorry about that - I mistype 'Marcive' all the time. Despite that, it is the
site I meant, sans 'h'.
It will resolve correctly but I wouldn't advise visiting - take precautions.
Google search results also suggest it is compromised and the page sources
contain pharma metadata.
I emailed and
Righty. I had to view the source, but I saw the injected text.
I gave the one contact I know at marcive a call. She saw it too.
Yours,
Kevin
-Original Message-
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of
Sam Kome
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 3:24 PM
http://marcive.com goes to the right place for me. It is the one you mentioned
in the subject line of your email.
http://marchive.com (note the h) goes to a domain squatter. It is the one
you mentioned in the body of your email.
Which one is causing you the issue?
Cordially,
Kevin
**_Come join us in Austin, Texas at the Texas Digital Library_**_ TDL is
growing and needs your help! We're rapidly moving towards some exciting things
in digital libraries, and we'd love to have you on our team! _
_**Purpose**_
To design, develop, maintain and enhance the systems that
We use LCSH in our system, but we don't have unmediated deposits, so it
isn't a problem that research faculty and staff don't know LCSH. One of the
major reasons for LCSH over other vocabularies is we want our repository to
integrate with records for our library catalog which uses LCSH. That said,
What Ross said, Shaun. We also allow users to key in free-text subjects,
since LCSH is not everything to everyone.
-Mike
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Shaun Ellis sha...@princeton.edu wrote:
Mike, what do you mean when you say don't think in terms of LCSH? Is
there some other
20 matches
Mail list logo
