Update on the Gopher subject list proposal

Ton Verschuren <Ton.Verschuren@surfnet.nl> Tue, 01 December 1992 12:28 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01337; 1 Dec 92 7:28 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01333; 1 Dec 92 7:28 EST
Received: from kona.CC.McGill.CA by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03818; 1 Dec 92 7:28 EST
Received: by kona.cc.mcgill.ca (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2b/CC-Guru-2b) id AA06310 on Tue, 1 Dec 92 03:58:49 -0500
Received: from survis.surfnet.nl by kona.cc.mcgill.ca with SMTP (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2b/CC-Guru-2b) id AA06305 (mail destined for /usr/lib/sendmail -odq -oi -fnir-request nir-out) on Tue, 1 Dec 92 03:58:37 -0500
Received: from surfnet.nl by survis.surfnet.nl with SMTP (PP) id <09660-0@survis.surfnet.nl>; Tue, 1 Dec 1992 09:58:16 +0100
Received: from localhost by surprice.surfnet.nl (4.1/SMI-4.1(TV920629)) id AA25192; Tue, 1 Dec 92 09:58:13 +0100
Message-Id: <9212010858.AA25192@surprice.surfnet.nl>
To: Jill.Foster@newcastle.ac.uk
Cc: Anders Gillner <awg@sunet.se>, eurogopher@ebone.net, gvl@unt.edu, iafa@cc.mcgill.ca, jkrey@isi.edu, nir@cc.mcgill.ca
Subject: Update on the Gopher subject list proposal
In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 01 Dec 92 05:21:01 +0000. <emu-ct08.1992.1201.052101.njf@eata.ncl.ac.uk>
Organisation: SURFnet bv
Address: Cluetinckborch, P.O. Box 19035, 3501 DA Utrecht, NL
Phone: +31 30 310290
Telefax: +31 30 340903
Date: Tue, 01 Dec 92 09:58:04 +0100
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Ton Verschuren <Ton.Verschuren@surfnet.nl>

Hi all,

This discussion is spreading out over more and more lists. It started
on eurogopher, then iafa was added and now I add nir as requested by
Jill Foster. That means I'll be getting every message 4 times... Maybe
we should restrict the discussion to one list after this message?

OK, now: Previously on these lists:

On eurogopher we have been discussing how to make a subject oriented
tree in Gopher instead of the current geographical tree. Then the
questiuon pops up: which subject tree, i.e. what classification scheme
should we use?

In the SURFnet Infoserver project the librarians we cooperate with
came up with a classification scheme based on the Unesco Bibliography
list. This one contains 33 categories:

Unesco Subject List:
 
1  General
2  Philosophy, psychology
3  Religion, theology
4  Sociology, statistics
5  Political science and economy
6  Law, government administration
7  Military science
8  Instruction and education
9  Trade
10 Ethnology and folklore
11 Linguistics
12 Pure science and history of science
13 Mathematics
14 Astronomy and physics
15 Chemistry
16 Geology, meteorology
17 Biology
18 Medical science
19 Technology, industry, crafts
20 Agriculture, fishery
21 Domestic science
22 Science of industrial organization
23 Urbanization, architecture, arts, photography, film, radio, tv
24 Recreation, sports, games
25 History of literature and criticism
26 Poetry
27 Theatre
28 Prose
29 Various, essays
30 Geography, travel description
31 History, (auto)biography
32 Children's books, cartoons
33 Educational appliances

It seems quite a job to map the current subjects into these
categories. What we  would like to see is that Subject maintainer
volunteer to maintain their part of the subject tree.

But before that we should reach consensus on a wide scale as to what
the best classification scheme is. 

Tony Barry (tony@info.anu.edu.au) favours the Library of Congress
scheme, which can be seen at:

Name=The Electronic Library
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/library/elibrary
Host=info.anu.edu.au

This whole discussion can be read at:

Name=Eurogopher mailinglist
Type=1
Port=70
Path=m/eurogopher
Host=sunic.sunet.se

So far for this update. Now let's discuss classification schemes. I
would strongly recommend that you involve your local (or national)
librarian in this discussion.

Bye,

Ton Verschuren - Network Development - SURFnet bv

==> From: Jill.Foster@newcastle.ac.uk

> Re:
> 
> > 
> > Ton,
> > 
> > I am including the proposed subject tree as I send this letter as a copy
> > to a couple of people and lists. 
> 
> Anders and Ton: I'd be grateful if you could send a brief update on this toth
 e 
> nir list.
> 
> People here in Australia are interested in working in this area too.
> 
> There are lots of librarians wh would lve to get into the discussion.
> (Or I'd love them to!!s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've been pointing them to the nir list (as being the list to keep informed o
 f
> new initiatives. )
> 
> 
> 
> discussion. (At least I'd love them to!)
> 
> Excuse typos.
> 
> Keep up the good work. 
> 
> -- Jill