[Sigia-l] Endeca in the Library

[Tito Sierra]

Hi Christopher,

As someone that worked both on the NCSU Endeca-based catalog makeover  
and the alternative "Browse Subjects" hierarchy you reference below,  
I should probably chime in here.

The LC classification dimension that you see in our catalog (after a  
search, or via the Browse tab) is designed to exploit existing  
metadata associated with our catalog records.  The LC system is used  
by most research and university libraries in the US.  LC  
classification is a highly granular classification system with many  
levels of hierarchy.  At the highest level it does look arbitrary to  
modern eyes.  For example, "Naval Science" is a sibling of "Science"  
at the top level.  You can learn some brief history here:  http:// 
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LC_classification

The Endeca software allows us to integrate LC classification as a  
navigation device in the catalog search process.  Users can combine  
their search terms AND LC classification drilldrown AND language  
selection AND availability status, to get the slice of catalog  
results they are looking for.  Users that don't find the LC  
classification useful will probably use other refinements to narrow  
their results (or maybe just use narrower search terms).

The alternative "Browse Subjects" classification we offer on our  
website (http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/browsesubjects/) is *much* smaller  
in scope with approximately 100 nodes in 13 categories.  This  
classification was created in-house recently and was designed with  
our university curricula in mind.   For example, we have a "Textiles"  
top level category because NCSU has a College of Textiles.  We use  
these categories to organize a broader range of library content than  
what is in the catalog.  For example, the "Textiles Chemistry"  
catalog provides students with a listing of article database and  
journals in this subject area, as well as the contact info for  
"Textiles" subject area specialists (human beings) in the library.   
Some benefits of this classification system are that it was designed  
with our users in mind and can be refreshed by us over time as needed.

Tito

----

Tito Sierra
Digital Library Initiatives
North Carolina State University



> I assume that this (below) is the Library of Congress  
> Classification System?
> http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/catalog/browse.html
>
> But the site also features this alternative browsing hierarchy:
> http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/browsesubjects/
>
> To me, the LOC system seems fairly arbitrary and generalized... But  
> the
> second system seems like it might be designed to better match the  
> type of
> material actually contained in the library and desired by the users.
>
> I also like that the second system is not mutually-exclusive: "Art"  
> is found
> both under "Design" and under "Humanities".
>
> I'd be extremely interested in other people's opinions on the relative
> merits of these two different top-level classification systems.
>
> [My background is largely in the "interaction-design" part of IA,  
> not the
> library science side, so forgive me if this is IA 101 for some of  
> you :-) ]
>
> -Cf
>
> Christopher Fahey
> ____________________________
> Behavior
> http://www.behaviordesign.com
>