[1103] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
Re: Subject Headings for Gopher Virtual Library
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Will Stuivenga)
Mon Aug 31 12:30:03 1992
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 11:12:14 CDT
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <PACS-L%UHUPVM1.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
From: Will Stuivenga <VSGA1001%SMUVM1.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list PACS-L <PACS-L%UHUPVM1.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
In-Reply-To: Message of Fri,
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
On Fri, 28 Aug 1992 14:14:37 CDT William Oldfield said:
>
>Someone mentioned using the Library of Congress classification system as
>the organizing principle. Using classification at least solves the
>problem of volatile terminology. But because the LC classification is
>additive and grows in any direction as new subjects arise I would argue
>against it. Dewey on the other hand is logical approach to the
>organization of knowledge. As subject areas changes it would also be a
>relatively simple matter for a machine to chomp through a database and map
>the old numbers to the new organization. But whether subject headings or
American librarians have been trained to think LC or Dewey, and that's it.
In actuality, there are superior classification systems. This would be
an excellent opportunity to look outside the extremely narrow focus of
classification systems used in this country to choose a really good one.
Or one that is well suited to the needs of the Gopher project. I would
certainly recommend looking at the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC)
a scheme widely used in Europe and elsewhere, and
which was developed out of Dewey originally, perhaps the scheme developed
by Bliss, and the modern versions (if they exist) of the principles of
faceted classification developed by Ranganathan and others.
Before making a decision of this type, one should do some reading, and try
to get up to date in modern classification theory and practice; what are
considered the "best" classification systems for automated retrieval
systems? Those I've mentioned may not be the top contenders, as my
limited knowledge is more historical than contemporary.
I might be able to provide some cites for starting points, if desired.
Will Stuivenga <VSGA1001@SMUVM1> or <VSGA1001@VM.CIS.SMU.EDU>
Database Services Reference Librarian, Fondren Library
Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX 75275
(214) 692-3666 fax (214) 360-0609
