>Jonathan, I, too, like the use of facets. I wish we could do something a bit more "zing" with them, like present them as word clouds or something a bit more appealing than "term (number)" but I think the basic data is there.
>Facets, as we use them, though, function as set *narrowing* tools. That's very useful when you have a large set, but I'd like to see another function that leads users to nearby areas -- this obviously invokes the idea of topic maps. although I have to admit that topic maps don't always seem very provocative. There's probably some way that we could do them better.
>I do think that both facets and topic maps may work better using FAST-type headings rather than full LCSH pre-coordinated subject headings. That FAST is derived from LCSH (rather than being developed specifically as a faceted classification) probably makes it something of an under-performer, but the related subjects that appear on the Open Library subject pages give a clue as to how something like this might work. I'd love to see more experimentation in this direction.
Mebbe summat like
? I have ever thought that it was quite sexy, and shamlessly used it for music collection development and listener's advisory. Now it's bigger than just music, which is sweet as, bro.