> Gary, I'm a former cataloger so I am comfortable with the entire
> concept, although after years in public service I will lean toward the
> vernacular. For instance, in the DC.Subject element, for the most part
> I use LCSH, however, one of our web pages is a collection of glass
> lantern slides. LCSH would apply "Slides (Photographic)" to
> this...well...anyone trolling the net interested in *glass lantern
> slides* is going to use the vernacular.
One of the parts missing from this whole discussion is that LC subject
headings (as well as name headings) are based on the use of
cross-references.
When you search "Glass lantern slides" in LCSH, you find nothing, but if
you search "Slides (Photographic)" you find narrower terms leading to:
CATALOGING OF SLIDES (LC 550 bab)
FILMSTRIPS (LC 550 bab)
LANTERN SLIDES (LC 550 bab)
PATHOLOGY--SLIDES PHOTOGRAPHY (LC 550 bab)
SLIDEX INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM (LC 550 bab)
TRANSPARENCIES (LC 550 bab)
VISUAL EDUCATION (LC 550 bab)
VISUAL EDUCATION (LC 550 bab)
as well as broader terms:
Audio-visual materials
Photographs
and related terms:
Filmstrips
Transparencies
Visual education
There is only one "use for" reference under Lantern slides:
Magic lantern slides
but there is no problem with adding another one for
Glass lantern slides
And LC added the useful note:
(Lantern slides; UF Magic lantern slides: hand-drawn, painted, or
photographic images on glass, intended for viewing by projection; often
made in sets. Photographic lantern slides were introduced in the U.S. by
1850 and popular through World War I)
I find this sort of arrangement far more useful and enlightening to a
searcher than finding simple "matching records" or "non-matching
records".
Comments from another cataloger.
Jim Weinheimer
Princeton University
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|