Re: Meta tags and Keyword usage

---------

Rev. Mama Lani (lani@lava.net)
Wed, 4 Feb 1998 14:04:21 -1000 (HST)

On Wed, 4 Feb 1998, Al Gilman wrote:
>There are policy pitfalls for faqs.org to serve as a cataloguer and
>apply keywords other than what the author said. Consider the PICS
>wars.
>
>Your list is better than what people have been using, but even better
>would be to nurse out of the search-engine-operating community some
>suggestions of vocabulary that they feel is useful in terms of
>dividing

I've emailed Kent and have already gotten a positive response from him on
this, but I figured I'd reply to the list as well. As a degreed librarian
I recommend using the Library of Congress Subject Headings. LCSH is
exhaustive and already handles the subject headings/descriptors for every
single book and non-print title currently available in US libraries today.
1. Headers found in LCSH can be used free of charge (well technically we
pay for it in our taxes) so there are are no copyright or intellectual
property issues.
2. LCSH is *exhaustive* and covers every subject available.
3. The LCSH headings were created with care by professional catalogers
over decades.
4. LCSH's format allows for hierarchical classification (e.g. "Computer
programs -- word processing -- Microsoft Word -- how-to manual") as
well.
5. Best of all, it provides absolute consistency.
6. An additional benefit is that it will even be a boon to today's
librarians, who are all tearing their hair out because you can't ever
find anything on the Internet (I'm sorry, but 3,000 hits for a query
does NOT make for a successful search).

My threepence worth. :>

--Lani

.+'*'+. .+'*'+. .+'*'+. .+'*'+. .+'*'+.
****Rev. Mama Lani (ULC) <lani@lava.net>....http://www.lava.net/~lani****
* + + Mac users simply want more plug-n-play than plug-n-pray. + + *
'+.,.+' '+.,.+' '+.,.+' '+.,.+'