Future of Bibliographic Control

A month ago I watched most of the video debut of the Report of the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control and was disappointed by the group’s approach to control what clearly needs to be opened up a bit. Last night I read several responses to the report and was impressed by most of them. I was floored by them, actually. (The library world has such good writers!) If you can’t read all the reviews, at least start with Roy Tennant. His “descriptive enrichment” concept is the way to go. I considered including his closing paragraph here, but using such a short excerpt would be cheating you out of his whole, well-reasoned commentary.

One Response to Future of Bibliographic Control

  1. Alex says:

    I like this idea a lot. Integration of taxonomy and folksonomy were topics that routinely came up while I was in library school (oh, so long ago!) at Michigan. While everyone agreed that having a taxonomy was an excellent idea, because everyone will tag things differently, and it’s freakishly difficult to get inside someone else’s head (even with a practiced reference interview). At the same time, taxonomic classification can be academic and nonintuitive. Folksonomy helps when there are nonofficial names attached to things, so you can find doohickies and whatchamacalits by the name you know them by. I look forward to the time when we can search catalog by LoC subjects, RDA descriptors, or consult the catalog tag cloud to find something new.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: