Re: Interoperability - subject classification/terminology

From: Guy Aron <guyaron_at_YAHOO.COM.AU>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 09:55:21 +1100

I think we need to be careful to identify just what
activity the original poster was being required to do.
The discussion so far seems to assume that Eprints was
requiring input of Library of Congress classification
number. From his original post, however, it seems more
likely that the input being required was Library of
Congress subject headings:
> >
> > On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, W F Clocksin wrote:
> >
> > > Hi. I am a beginning user of Eprints, and am
> entering metadata on the
> > > default test archive interface. It is a real
> nuisance to have to
> > > specify the Subject (which uses the Library of
> Congress system). For
> > > books this makes sense because the catalog
> information is in the front
> > > matter of the book, but it is unclear to me why
> I should have to do
> > > this for journal articles.

I would not particularly support the use of a
classification system like LC or Dewey in an eprint
archive. The use of a controlled vocabulary like LC,
however, seems much more appropriate. Controlled
vocabulary versus free text is still controversial;
it's a different issue, however, from classification.
Before we spend more time on this discussion I think
we need to be clear just what it is we're debating.
Perhaps the original poster could clarify this point?

Guy Aron - Yahoo! Mobile
- Check & compose your email via SMS on your Telstra or Vodafone mobile.
Received on Tue Mar 11 2003 - 22:55:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:46:54 GMT