 |
 |
Even if there was a URI for LCC, I wouldn't put it in rft_id unless an individual LCC uniquely identifies a particular manifestation--I don't _think_ it does, I think two books can share the same LCC? But I guess not when you include all the trailing 'cutter'-type numbers? At any rate, there clearly isn't a good place for LCC in a SAP1/2 OpenURL. But we should probably take this interesting (to some of us) discussion to the OpenURL list. Jonathan Hellman,Eric wrote: > True, but sad. > > Sent from Eric Hellman's iPhone > 1-862-596-0116 > > > On Dec 8, 2008, at 2:20 PM, "Karen Coyle" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Eric Hellman wrote: >>> Yep. There's no URI for LCC. You could put LCC in the subject field >>> of a >>> dublin core profile metadata format ContextObject. But it's not >>> clear why >>> anyone would want to do that. >>> >>> >> >> Well, it could provide some -- dare I say? -- CONTEXT. Having the >> classification could help a resolver route the request to the >> appropriate library catalog if a union catalog isn't available. >> Having the classification could aid a service trying to disambiguate >> author names. Having the classification could provide a library with >> interesting statistics on requests, failed requests, and collection >> development. >> >> Probably none of this is done today, but I think the LCC will become >> more interesting to us as we begin to go beyond bibliographic >> matching to bibliographic data mining. >> >> kc >> >> -- >> ----------------------------------- >> Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant >> [log in to unmask] http://www.kcoyle.net >> ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet >> fx.: 510-848-3913 >> mo.: 510-435-8234 >> ------------------------------------ >> > -- Jonathan Rochkind Digital Services Software Engineer The Sheridan Libraries Johns Hopkins University 410.516.8886 rochkind (at) jhu.edu