4631Re: [TaxoCoP] Tagging to levels
- Oct 17, 2013I don't think you're missing anything. You've got the principle of specificity on your side and IMO it is up to the database designer to defend their position. Why do they think that? Do they have any evidence that it's a best practice in use anywhere?
I found a nice quote about specificity at http://www.iva.dk/bh/lifeboat_ko/concepts/specificity.htm:
"The principle of specificity in indexing is in particular associated with Charles A. Cutter's Rules for a Printed Dictionary Catalog (1876) and probably no other principle for indexing or classification has the same amount of acceptance and propagation. Cutter wrote: "Enter a work under its subject-heading, not under the heading of a class which includes that subject. EX. Put Lady Cust's book on "the Cat" under CAT, not under ZOOLOGY or MAMMALS or DOMESTIC ANIMALS"."
That's at least 137 years of established library science practice!On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:11 PM, <karen_bulow@...> wrote:
I am a librarian turned content manager/taxonomist. In my 15 years as a librarian, I was always taught to tag content to the appropriate term no matter the level. I now am in the corporate world and am working on a database where I tag books and chapters. The designer of the database thinks that the books should not be tagged any lower than our first level in the taxo and subsequent information encompassed in that book should only be tagged at a lower level than the book tagging. This is very limiting on the scope of the content I am working with for some books as some books, in my mind, should be tagged at a lower level as the content is specific to lower level tags. What am I missing? Has anyone else run across such rules? Is there any validity to them? I don't see the validity in this.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>