Even if there was a URI for LCC, I wouldn't put it in rft_id unless an
individual LCC uniquely identifies a particular manifestation--I don't
_think_ it does, I think two books can share the same LCC? But I guess
not when you include all the trailing 'cutter'-type numbers?
At any rate, there clearly isn't a good place for LCC in a SAP1/2 OpenURL.
But we should probably take this interesting (to some of us) discussion
to the OpenURL list.
Jonathan
Hellman,Eric wrote:
True, but sad.
Sent from Eric Hellman's iPhone
1-862-596-0116
On Dec 8, 2008, at 2:20 PM, "Karen Coyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Eric Hellman wrote:
Yep. There's no URI for LCC. You could put LCC in the subject field
of a
dublin core profile metadata format ContextObject. But it's not
clear why
anyone would want to do that.
Well, it could provide some -- dare I say? -- CONTEXT. Having the
classification could help a resolver route the request to the
appropriate library catalog if a union catalog isn't available.
Having the classification could aid a service trying to disambiguate
author names. Having the classification could provide a library with
interesting statistics on requests, failed requests, and collection
development.
Probably none of this is done today, but I think the LCC will become
more interesting to us as we begin to go beyond bibliographic
matching to bibliographic data mining.
kc
--
-----------------------------------
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------
--
Jonathan Rochkind
Digital Services Software Engineer
The Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
410.516.8886
rochkind (at) jhu.edu
