1. The Future of LCSH Adam L. Schiff, Principal Cataloger ALUW Winter Quarter Meeting, March 6, 2008

2. Abandon LCSH? Several recent reports have called for the abandonment of LCSH, including: Calhoun, Karen. 2006. The Changing Nature of the Catalog and its Integration with Other Discovery Tools. http://www.loc.gov/catdir/calhoun-report-final.pdf University of California Libraries. Bibliographic Services Task Force. 2005. Rethinking How We Provide Bibliographic Services for the University of California. http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/sopag/BSTF/Final. pdf

3. LC’s Response In 2006 the Cataloging Policy and Support Office (CPSO) at LC was asked to review the pros and cons of pre- versus post- coordination of LCSH, and to make recommendations to LC’s Acquisitions and Bibliographic Access (ABA) management group. Their report was delivered to the Director of ABA in March 2007. ABA management approved it in June 2007.

4. Pre-Coordination and Post- Coordination Pre-coordination = combining elements (facets) into a heading string Tuna fisheries -- Bycatches -- Pacific Ocean -- Mathematical models. Post-coordination = combining headings or keywords by a searcher at the time he/she searches find “bycatches” and “tuna”

5. Pre-Coordination and Post- Coordination LCSH is primarily a pre-coordinate system, but many complex topics require post-coordination to adequately provide subject coverage, because no one single subject string can be constructed to bring out the subject of many works. In such situations, the array of headings, taken together, is “coextensive” with the subject of a work.

6. Pre-Coordination and Post- Coordination Subject headings: Fishery closures -- Pacific Ocean -- Mathematical models. Tuna fisheries -- Bycatches -- Pacific Ocean -- Mathematical models. Tuna fisheries -- Pacific Ocean -- Statistics. Silky shark -- Mortality -- Pacific Ocean -- Prevention -- Statistics. Theses -- Fisheries. Title: Trade-offs in the design of fishery closures : silky shark bycatch management in the eastern Pacific Ocean tuna purse seine fishery

7. Back to LC’s Response In February 2008, LC publicly released the report prepared by CPSO, with annotations on recommendations added from October 2007, and revisions made in December 2007. The posted version lists actions that LC will take to implement the recommendations. Library of Congress. Cataloging Policy and Support Office. 2007. Library of Congress Subject Headings: Pre- vs. Post-Coordination and Related Issues. http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/pre_vs_post.pdf

8. The Bottom Line The report recommended, and LC’s management accepted, that LC’s catalogers will continue to assign pre- coordinated LCSH terms The benefits of pre-coordinated strings outweigh the costs and disadvantages of them Post-coordinated searching (which is what most users do) is enhanced by having pre- coordinated subject strings

9. Key Recommendations Continue pre-coordinated strings Incorporate more automated assistance and simplified application rules ACTION: CPSO will continue to develop and maintain LCSH for pre-coordinated assignment and continue to recommend automated ways to facilitate clustering, guided searching, faceting on the fly, and machine validation. -Future search engines will develop post-coordinated faceting capabilities by taking advantage of mining of LCSH tagged strings -Encourage more participation in SACO -Further develop automated authority record generation and machine validation to simplify catalogers’ efforts

10. Key Recommendations New search engine front end to LC’s ILS that offers guided search or clustered searching and enables social tagging (folksonomy), particularly from reference librarians ACTION: ABA has requested approval to use funds to conduct an RFI to compare front-end search engines

11. Key Recommendations Simplify further the cataloger’s work in devising subject strings a) Automate LCSH term assignment further 1) increase use of Classification Web to suggest previously used subject headings and class numbers ACTION: CPSO will continue project to add class numbers to subject authority records to enhance Classification Web capabilities

12. Key Recommendations a) Automate LCSH term assignment further 2) Implement software to suggest subject headings and class numbers for all digital texts ACTION: CPSO will work with automation specialists to explore metadata generation software used by outside agencies and experimental systems being studied elsewhere. Hopefully implement something in FY 08.

13. Key Recommendations Simplify further the cataloger’s work in devising subject strings b) Further automate verification and validation of strings ACTION: CPSO will expand creation of “validation records.” Eventually several million of these will be created. They will not be printed in the red books.

14. Validation Record

15. Key Recommendations Simplify further the cataloger’s work in devising subject strings c) Build more coded structures within LCSH so that subject authority records can be matched with appropriate free- floating subdivisions For example, code the heading “Cotton” as a plant/crop, so that automated systems could provide a linked list of subdivisions usable under plants and crops for the cataloger to choose from.

16. Key Recommendations Simplify further the cataloger’s work in devising subject strings d) Remove subdivision by language for all subject headings except dictionaries, e.g. Catholic Church -- Catechisms -- French Chinese language -- Conversation and phrase books -- Thai Retrieval by language would rely on language coding in 008/35-37 fixed field and 041 field. Requires a system that can guide users to options to limit search by language.

17. Key Recommendations d) Remove subdivision by language for all subject headings except dictionaries ACTION: CPSO will coordinate test with LC’s reference librarians to check the impact of this recommendation. Before any change in policy, CPSO will prepare notices to users and seek comments and suggestions during FY 08. Will also check to see if any other categories besides dictionaries should remain an exception.

18. Key Recommendations Simplify further the cataloger’s work in devising subject strings e) Explore giving some form subdivisions in a separate 655 field (genre/form) as a form heading rather than redundantly with each subject heading, e.g. A tourist map of Aberdeen, Cosmopolis, and Hoquiam: Aberdeen (Wash.) Cosmopolis (Wash.) Hoquiam (Wash.) Maps, Tourist

19. Key Recommendations Test feasibility of offering LCSH in a format usable on the Web ACTION: LC will make LCSH freely available on the Web in SKOS (Simple Knowledge Organisation System) format, a common data model for sharing and linking knowledge organization systems via the Semantic Web. LCSH in MARC 21 format will continue to be available by subscription.

20. LC Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control Issued its final report on January 9, 2008: http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/news/lcwg- ontherecord-jan08-final.pdf 4.3 Optimize LCSH for Use and Reuse 4.3.1 Transform LCSH 4.3.2 Pursue De-Coupling of Subject Strings 4.3.3 Encourage Application of, and Cross-Referencing with, Other Controlled Subject Vocabularies 4.3.4 Recognize the Potential of Computational Indexing in the Practice of Subject Analysis

21. LC Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control 4.3.1Transform LCSH 4.3.1.1 Transform LCSH into a tool that provides a more flexible means to create and modify subject authority data. 4.3.1.2 Make LCSH openly available for use by library and non-library stakeholders. 4.3.1.3 Provide LCSH in its current alphabetical arrangement, and enable its customized assembly into topical thesauri. 4.3.1.4 Increase explicit correlation and referencing between LCSH terms and LCC and DDC numbers.

22. LC Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control 4.3.2 Pursue De-Coupling of Subject Strings 4.3.2.1 Work with appropriate partners on ways to take advantage of the power of the controlled vocabulary in LCSH, LCC, and DDC. Describe or identify products or schemes that could take advantage of those terminologies in a more accessible environment with broader audiences. 4.3.2.2 Evaluate the ability of LCSH to support faceted browsing and discovery.

23. LC Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control 4.3.3 Encourage Application of, and Cross-Referencing with, Other Controlled Subject Vocabularies 4.3.3.1 Provide references within LCSH, where appropriate, and between LCSH and other established sources of controlled subject headings, such as MeSH, the National Agricultural Libraries Thesaurus, Sears List of Subject Headings, and the Getty Art & Architecture Thesaurus. Make vocabularies cross-searchable and interoperable. 4.3.3.2 Make use of any systems of controlled subject headings that are appropriate to augment subject access for one’s collections and users. 4.3.3.3 Explore mechanisms to exploit cross-vocabulary linkages to enhance retrieval, without limiting to the headings explicitly provided in individual bibliographic records. 4.3.3.4 Explore ways of reducing creation costs and improving effectiveness by synchronizing work more closely between DDC, LCSH, and LCC, the main ‘universal’ library approaches to subject analysis.

24. LC Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control 4.3.4 Recognize the Potential of Computational Indexing in the Practice of Subject Analysis 4.3.4.1 For works where full text is available in digital form, study the extent to which computational analysis and indexing of the digital text can assist catalogers in subject analysis or can supplement or substitute for traditional intellectual subject analysis. (Note: this may vary by genre of work, audience, or access scenarios.) 4.3.4.2 Based on the results of the previous recommendation, examine the tradeoffs and potential resource savings of using computational analysis and indexing to substitute for some subject analysis. 4.3.4.3 Initiate a standards process that allows the various results of computational analysis and indexing to be interchanged and shared as part of bibliographic records, in order to permit sharing of metadata without necessarily sharing the underlying resource.