 |
 |
Thanks, that helps. It makes sense to think over the goal of the controlled vocabulary. I just started working with this and I know the subject terms for the existing material are bad, we have things like "A Computational complexity" and "Ping of Death" so that is not going to help our researchers and students find articles that would help. I suspect like Kelsey said it will have some amount of iteration to it, but it will help to have a controlled vocabulary to use as a base, the taxonomy warehouse looks to be useful in that regard. Thanks again for the insight. On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Jacob Ratliff <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > 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 you want to > use MeSH <https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/> for all the medical information, > or is that too detailed?) > Are you just looking for cursory subject headings so that people can find a > larger collection that they're looking for? (LoC could be good for this) > Are you going to use a different controlled vocabulary for each collection? > (e.g. MeSH for dentistry, LoC for general, etc.) > Who is going to go back and re-tag all of the digital objects with new > metadata? > > You can also look at www.taxonomywarehouse.com for some ideas of different > controlled vocabularies that are available. I also recommend the Art and > Architecture Thesaurus <http://www.getty.edu/vow/AATSearchPage.jsp> for > art > assets. > > Is this kind of what you're looking for? I highly recommend sitting down > and defining what your goals are for the controlled vocabulary you want to > implement, because that will inform that type of vocabulary you use. > > Jacob Ratliff > Archivist/Taxonomy Librarian > National Fire Protection Association > > > On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Matthew Sherman > <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > > > 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 something at is extensible. Does that provide a better idea > > or should I provide more info? > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Jacob Ratliff <[log in to unmask] > > >wrote: > > > > > 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 > > > Archivist/Taxonomy Librarian > > > National Fire Protection Association > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Matthew Sherman > > > <[log in to unmask]>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 > > > > > > > > > >