Quoting Jonathan Rochkind <[log in to unmask]>:

> Ah, but we're not talking about "entry vocabulary", we're talking  
> about labelling shelf ranges.

At my job at UC we had a rule: if you display it, the user should be  
able to search it and get those same results. If you display one set  
of strings as a shelf label, and a different set of strings are  
required for retrieval, that's going to be confusing. Ideally users  
should be able to search within the classification scheme, or to  
navigate around, but we don't have that ability. The point of my blog  
post is that we have separate systems and it can't be clear to users  
how they interact. (I'm not even sure they do interact cleanly.) The  
only way users can make sense of things is by extrapolating from what  
we display to them. I worry that seeing inside LCC, while being given  
only LCSH to search on, isn't going to be clear. While LCSH loses a  
lot of the structure of LCC, at least users are seeing what they would  
need to search on in the catalog to get those same results.

kc

>
> But I agree that the headings for LCC will be less user friendly  
> than LCSH.  If there was a way to get LCC-to-LCSH mappings in an  
> easily usable way without paying tens of thousands of dollars, that  
> would be clever. (I'm not sure there's a way to get them even if you  
> DO pay millions of dollars).
>
> So I was suggesting using the LCC headings themselves as a more  
> feasible alternate plan, is all. I agree it would be insufficient if  
> we needed an "entry vocabulary".  But just for labelling shelf  
> ranges on display, I think it's probably not worse than nothing.
>
> Of course, that's up to the implementer, what's better than nothing.
>
>> Quoting Jonathan Rochkind <[log in to unmask]>:
>>
>>
>>> For #2, you can provide a useful topical/subject type heading via  
>>> much simpler and more feasible solutions than mapping to LCSH.   
>>> For #2, you don't need a map to LCSH, you need the LCC schedules  
>>> with descriptions of what each range of LCC call numbers is for,  
>>> in machine-readable form.
>>
>> I would give the opposite advice. LCC will have fewer pre-composed  
>> headings than LCSH at id.loc.gov, and the terminology associated  
>> with the numbers in digital LCC will be less user-centric than the  
>> LCSH subject headings. cf my most recent blog post:
>>
>>   http://kcoyle.blogspot.com/2011/10/relativ-index.html
>>
>> There isn't any entry vocabulary for users other than LCSH -- which  
>> isn't really entry vocabulary to LCC and is definitely NOT entry  
>> vocabulary to DDC.
>>
>> kc
>>
>>>
>>>> Thanks everybody!
>>>>
>>>> this is useful for a couple of purposes
>>>> 1) sometimes we have records that have call numbers, but no  
>>>> subject headings.
>>>> this would be useful to provide those.
>>>> 2) i'm thinking of providing a 'subject heading' label to our  
>>>> shelf browser --
>>>> so users see, in addition to the callnumber -- what the call number means.
>>>>
>>>> thanks again!
>>>> rick
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Jonathan  
>>>> Rochkind<[log in to unmask]>  wrote:
>>>>> Anyone know if the OCLC Terminology Service provides such a mapping? The
>>>>> Terminology Service may be free if you are already an OCLC cataloging
>>>>> member.
>>>>>
>>>>> At one point I think I saw an absolutely free open access  
>>>>> machine readable
>>>>> mapping somewhere, that was made at some point in the past and no longer
>>>>> updated... but I cant' remember where I saw that even.
>>>>>
>>>>>> LC's Classification Web provides a mapping from LC classifications to
>>>>>> LC subject headings.  There is a manual web interface, used mainly by
>>>>>> catalogers, which requires a subscription:
>>>>>>    http://classificationweb.net/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know if it has any kind of API.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Keith
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Enrico Silterra<[log in to unmask]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> is there any way to go from a LC call number,
>>>>>>> like DF853  to http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85057107
>>>>>>> via some sort of api? opensearch?
>>>>>>> thanks,
>>>>>>> rick
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>> Enrico Silterra Software Engineer
>>>>>>> 501 Olin Library Cornell University Ithaca NY 14853
>>>>>>> Voice: 607-255-6851 Fax:     607-255-6110 E-mail: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>>> http://www.library.cornell.edu/dlit
>>>>>>> "Out of the crooked timber of humanity no straight thing was ever made"
>>>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE
>>>>>>> The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only
>>>>>>> for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
>>>>>>> confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission,
>>>>>>> dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance
>>>>>>> upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended
>>>>>>> recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact
>>>>>>> the sender and destroy any copies of this document.
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet