Re: [IUG] Mountain biking was: Cataloging for Encore

[Steve Sowder <sowder at andrews dot edu>]

<soapbox>
This thread started with patrons adding tags to bib entries.  It 
quickly  evolved into  librarians wishing to extend searching (and LCSH) 
to include authority records. But, it is still just patrons adding tags. 
Yes, you can restrict it so that only catalogers/staff can be the only 
ones adding tags but that misses the point. These tags are NOT part of 
the bib record subject entries, but are stored separately.

Patron tags are for patrons to add their own descriptors to an item. 
Patrons may collectively decide that "All terrain cycling"  needs to 
have "Mountain biking" added (esp. if catalogers are involved!) or not. 
They may just as well add "Bicycling", "Sports", "Road Trip", 
"Mountaineering", or anything else that relates to what just one person 
thinks. The tags are not bound by LCSH, culture, language, or even to 
what you think is common sense.

I think the thread so far has been an attempt to impose a taxonomy onto 
a folksonomy. To impose order upon disorder. That isn't going to happen.

Folksonomies work. (See also Myspace, youtube,  facebook,  Library Thing).
</soapbox>

My $0.02.

Steve Sowder
sowder at andrews dot edu

D. Brooking wrote:
> There is a way libraries can propose updates and new terms to LCSH. It is 
> the SACO program. Please see:
>
> http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/saco/saco.html
>
> (SACO covers both LCSH and LC Classification. Libraries can apply to be a 
> "member" which I think takes a commitment of doing 10-12 proposals per 
> year.)
>
> We (UW) will go ahead and make a change request to change "All terrain 
> cycling" to "Mountain biking" based on the overwhelming literary warrant 
> for the latter term.
>
> LC does retain ultimate editorial control over LCSH, so this is just a 
> proposal, but we have lots of experience in SACO and we are pretty sure 
> this will fly. LC is pretty backlogged so it may take 4-6 months for this 
> to work its way through the editorial process. And this workload at LC is 
> another reason that LC isn't initiating many changes themselves.
>
> So--change proposals have to come from the grass roots. Go for it. 
> Consider joining SACO, or find a library that is aleady in it that is 
> willing to help. Controlled vocabularies must be maintained in order to 
> remain useful and ultimately tagging individual bib records is not a 
> scalable solution.
>
>
>
> ************
> Diana Brooking             (206) 685-0389
> Cataloging Librarian       (206) 685-8782 fax
> Suzzallo Library           dbrookin at u dot washington dot edu
> University of Washington
> Box 352900
> Seattle WA  98195-2900
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>   
> > On Mon, 17 Dec 2007, Wynn, Stephen wrote:
> >
> >     
> > > I spoke last week about III's next-generation interface Encore, with
> > >       
> an
>   
> > > III rep who told me that whenever they do a demo, the catalogers
> > >       
> present
>   
> > > get very excited about the idea of adding tags in Encore.  "They
> > >       
> just
>   
> > > can't wait to add 'mountain biking' to all of those records that
> > >       
> have
>   
> > > 'All-terrain cycling,'" the rep said.  In previous demos I had
> > >       
> gotten
>   
> > > the idea that tagging was a feature for the user, but this rep
> > > specifically said that catalogers like the feature.
> > >
> > > (For those who haven't seen a demo, this last refers to III's claim
> > >       
> that
>   
> > > users can't find books about mountain biking because the LCSH is
> > > "All-terrain cycling."  I've heard this example from three different
> > > reps so it must be a house standard.)
> > >
> > > As a cataloger I find this response baffling.  The thought of
> > >       
> creating
>   
> > > and maintaining a nonstandard vocabulary ... well, it doesn't
> > >       
> exactly
>   
> > > fill me with joyful anticipation.
> > >
> > > But I must be missing something.  For those catalogers who anxiously
> > > await the opportunity to tag your records in Encore (or who already
> > >       
> do
>   
> > > so),
> > >
> > > What sorts of tags do you add?
> > >
> > > Why do you prefer an Encore tag to an uncontrolled MARC tag?
> > >
> > > Since "Mountain biking" is a SEE reference in the authority record
> > >       
> for
>   
> > > "All-terrain cycling," why do you need to add it as an Encore tag?
> > >
> > > Do you plan to review all of your authority records for SEE
> > >       
> references
>   
> > > that could be usefully added as Encore tags?
> > >
> > > Have you considered any automated methods of adding SEE references
> > >       
> as
>   
> > > Encore tags, in order to avoid the tedious and redundant manual work
> > > that Encore reps advocate?
> > >
> > > Stephen Wynn
> > > Head of Technical Services and Systems
> > > Pickler Memorial Library
> > > Truman State University
> > > Kirksville, MO 63501
> > > (660) 785-4535
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > This message was distributed through the Innovative Users Group
> > >       
> INNOPAC
>   
> > list
> >     
> > > Public replies:  INNOPAC at innopacusers dot org
> > > Update your subscription options:
> > >       
> > http://innopacusers.org/mailman/listinfo/innopac
> >     
> --
> This message was distributed through the Innovative Users Group INNOPAC list
> Public replies:  INNOPAC at innopacusers dot org
> Update your subscription options: http://innopacusers.org/mailman/listinfo/innopac
>
>
>   



--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
 text/plain (text body -- kept)
 text/html
---