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 <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 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?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Michael J. Giarlo
> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 10:06 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Subject Terms in Institutional Repositories
> 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.
> On Aug 30, 2013 9:28 AM, "Matthew Sherman" <[log in to unmask]>
> > 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