Select topic? #2
Comments
|
This is a good idea! And I like to bear quixotic spells!
I thought about using a TFIDF to see what the most representative names are for each topic. Maybe if I find some time this afternoon I’ll see if this offers up anything interesting…
…-Jer
On Oct 25, 2017, at 8:56 PM, Ed Summers ***@***.***> wrote:
This is just an idea, but I figured since you put this on GitHub you might be interesting in hearing crazy ideas from folks. I know, big assumption.
What if in addition to selecting the year you could select the topic too? Each book should have a call number, you could take the top level list of categories <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Congress_Classification#Class_K_.E2.80.93_Law> and use it see first names for Folklore in 1960, etc.
Maybe it's an awful idea, but the top level classification ought to be relatively easy to extract from the MARC records. The categories are kinda tiresome, the way they confine books to being about a particular topic, just so that they can be placed on a shelf in an orderly fashion. But maybe using them just as a way to look at first names kind of breaks their quixotic spell?
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAT282LsbVZ7jhiILjCLa3G52RZao4Meks5sv5JvgaJpZM4QGkbL>.
|
|
Some of these get overloaded (ie. William Shakespeare) but in general they're pretty good and in a lot of cases seem like they are people who should (but don't) exist: Collections. Series. Collected works: John Kim |
and others
This is just an idea, but I figured since you put this on GitHub you might be interesting in hearing crazy ideas from folks. I know, big assumption.
What if in addition to selecting the year you could select the topic too? Each book should have a call number, you could take the top level list of categories and use it see first names for Folklore in 1960, etc.
Maybe it's an awful idea, but the top level classification ought to be relatively easy to extract from the MARC records. The categories are kinda tiresome, the way they confine books to being about a particular topic, just so that the books can be placed on a shelf in an orderly fashion. But maybe using them as a way to look at first names breaks their quixotic spell?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: