4 Comments

  1. Since you are responding to my comments, I feel an obligation to defend them. <br /><br />You&#39;re not comparing apples to apples. Google does not contain the same collection of things as your catalog (which is sometimes good, and sometimes not, depending on what the user is looking for). <br /><br />In your catalog, you are assuming the user correctly finds that subject heading — how do they

    March 31, 2011
    Reply
  2. Continued…<br /><br />But in fact, relevancy ranking and subject cataloging can work great together. One thing missing from my first new catalog example up there is including lead-in (&quot;see from&quot;) terms from LCSH in the keyword index. That&#39;s not there yet, but really should be — if it was, maybe &quot;wwi&quot; and &quot;air warfare&quot; would have matched some lead-in terms?<br

    March 31, 2011
    Reply
  3. Thanks for your comments. I would like to make a few observations of my own, but I think we are substantially in agreement: best would be for the traditional subject headings to work in tandem with relevance ranking. For this to happen however, the system of finding the subject headings must be improved because as I mentioned: no one (other than a cataloger!) would ever come up with terms like &

    March 31, 2011
    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *