[Sigia-l] Re: Thesaurus: Node Labels vs Facet Indicators

[Melvin Kumar]

> 
> Personally I would have liked to have different names for the two types
> of node labels specified in the glossary, but others thought that they
> should both be called "node labels" while recognising the existence of
> two types with very different contents and properties.
>

I agree with you also that different names for two types of node
labels are needed. When I teach subject - matter - experts, the basics
of thesaurus so that they can help in the building of the thesaurus,
its very hard for them to understand the various concepts. When the
concepts are unique, its easier for them to grasp the meaning and
application..


 
> I'm not sure what you mean by "facet indicator labels" and "notation
> labels", but generally thesaurus software is very poor at handling node
> labels properly. At best they may be given an attribute that
> distinguishes them from thesaurus terms, but the relationship between
> them and the terms above and below them is generally just the standard
> BT/NT; really these are just labels interposed in order to group terms
> and should not themselves participate in the hierarchical structure.
>

Apologises if it was not clear enough. To identify a facet, you need a
"facet indicator"  , meaning there has to be a distinctive
differenciation in appearance of the facet indicator so that when
users see it they know that its a facet not something else. (
Interface issue)

Also, when they see a "node label" they must be able  distinctivly
differenciate that this is a "node label".

I thought Multites with the latest revision 2005, would support that,
but it does not, but as you put it "given an attribute that
distinguishes them from thesaurus terms, but the relationship between
them and the terms above and below them is generally just the standard
 BT/NT". It does that.

> Thesaurus software also cannot generally place these labels correctly in
> an alphabetical list if they are written in parentheses or angle
> brackets, as they conventionally are - they then sort at the start of
> the alphabet.


Thats has being my experience too.