There is however more to subject indexing than a thesaurus. To be of use outside
a local situation a subject indexing system needs a list of terms, a controlled
means of amending that list, rules for the use of the terms and a means of
storing those terms - a complete authority controlled indexing package.
LCSH has a rather large list of terms, which due to the rule of literary
warrant, provides many terms for things which have been the subject of books or
which feature in US archival collections. UNESCO is a short list of abstract
terms - it is interesting (well ...) to leaf
through them and try to work out what situation they were designed for (my guess
is a general library, where the wide range of very broad subjects would make
sense, rather than an archive which tends to hold large groups of similar
materials that need to be differentiated by fairly subtle variations of index
terms).
Where LCSH has grown up over a long period and has only recently had a thesaurus
structure imposed (with varying success) upon it, UNESCO was designed from the
ground up as a thesaurus. However, the list is only a small part of the process.
Leaving aside any
consideration of content the fundamental reason to hold
UNESCO in doubt as a solution is its lack of infrastructure. The rules for
applying LCSH are as long again as the list of terms, and it is here that the
maturity of LCSH becomes evident. If you are using indexing terms in a way that
can make sense between repositories, you need rules on how to index just as much
as you need index terms. These rules also provide for subdivision of terms by
place, period, subject, etc. which means a basic term can be analysed into many
hundreds of variants - if your entire repository is full of business records the
index term "Business records" alone is a cheap if ineffectual solution. Even the
punctuation of these sub divisions is set out and at least one pattern of
storage (MARC21) has been designed that allows the full potential of the system
to be used.
The Library of Congress has a programme for the maintenance and updating of the
list of terms, another complex and expensive task it seems wasteful to
duplicate.
LCSH has been used, not just by librarians, but by archivists across the USA who
will complain about using it (subject indexing is neither easy nor cheap) but
use it nevertheless. While it raises problems (American usage, etc.) LCSH at
least functions for a lot of users and is the product of many decades of
practical use. It seems a lot of effort to try to invent a
new wheel from scratch, and could lead to a rather bumpy and expensive ride.
--
Richard Higgins
Durham University Library
Archives & Special Collections
On Tue, 23 Apr 2002,
Burdon, Ali wrote:
>**********************************************************************
>WESTMINSTER CITY COUNCIL
>Please refer to the disclaimer beneath this message
>**********************************************************************
>
>I wonder if I am the only person to find Carl's email v. frustrating? I
>would dearly like to know what people have been writing to him about UNESCO
>and the use of thesauri in CROs. This is an issue which is of interest to
>lots of us, and I imagine this is just the sort of discussion we should be
>having on this list. Please could people rise above their reticence/
>modesty /shyness /whatever and post to the list if the issue is of general
>interest? Or maybe Carl would be kind a provide a more detailed summary?
>Please?
>Ali
>****************************
>Ali Burdon (Ms)
>Archivist
>City of Westminster Archives Centre
>10 St Ann's Street
>London
>SW1P 2DE
>
>[log in to unmask]
>020 7641 5180
>
>> ----------
>> From: Boardman, Carl - Cultural
>> Services[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 12:44 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Subject Indexes
>>
>> Many thanks to those people who replied to my query on this over the past
>> few days - I've learned quite a bit about the state of thesauri. UNESCO
>> certainly has support, but with the general proviso that its users have
>> had
>> to map their own indexes on to its structure because it's too high level
>> for
>> a CRO. However, I have also been tipped off to areas where other offices
>> have tackled this problem, and I'm duly getting in touch.
>>
>> Carl Boardman
>> Oxfordshire Record Office
>>
>> Oxfordshire Record Office is a section of Cultural Services in Oxfordshire
>> County Council. This message is intended only for the addressee, and OCC
>> can
>> take no responsibility for the accuracy of the information contained
>> therein, nor should the message be held as having any legal validity.
>>
>
>
>**********************************************************************
>Westminster City Council switchboard:
>+44 20 7641 6000
>**********************************************************************
>This E-Mail may contain information which is
>privileged, confidential and protected from
>disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient
>of this E-mail or any part of it, please telephone
>Westminster City Council immediately on receipt.
>You should not disclose the contents to any other
>person or take copies.
>**********************************************************************
>
|