3 ms·

Wow. When we started Amazon, this was precisely what I wanted to do, but using Library of Congress triple classifications instead of ISBN. It turned out to be

Wow. When we started Amazon, this was precisely what I wanted to do, but using Library of Congress triple classifications instead of ISBN. It turned out to be impossible because the data provider (a mixture of Baker & Tayler (book distributors) and Books In Print) munged the triple classification into a single string, so you could not find the boundaries reliably. Had to abandon the idea before I even really got started on it, and it would certainly have been challenging to do this sort of "flythrough" in the 1994-1995 version of "the web". Kudos!

dredmorbius 2y ago
What are you referring to as the LoC triple classification? I've spent quite some time looking at both the LoC Classification and the LoC Subject Headings. Sadly the LoC don't make either freely available in a useful machine-readable form, though it's possible to play games with the PDF versions. I'd been impressed by a few aspects of this, one point that particularly sticks in my mind is that the state-law section of the Classification shows a very nonuniform density of classifications amongst states. If memory serves, NY and CA are by far the most complex, with PA a somewhat distant third, and many of the "flyover" states having almost absurdly simple classifications, often quite similar. I suspect that this reflects the underlying statutory, regulatory, and judical / caselaw complexity. Another interesting historical factoid is that the classification and its alphabetic top-level segmentation apparently spring directly from Thomas Jefferson's personal library, which formed the origin of the LoC itself. For those interested, there's a lot of history of the development and enlargement of the Classification in the annual reports of the Librarian of Congress to Congress, which are available at Hathi Trust. Classification: <https://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/lcco/ https://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/lcco/> Subject headings: <https://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects.html https://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects.html> Annual reports: - Recent: <https://www.loc.gov/about/reports-and-budgets/annual-reports/ https://www.loc.gov/about/reports-and-budgets/annual-reports...> - Historical archive to ~1866: <https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000072049 https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000072049>
- smcin 2y ago
  Never knew about LoC book Classification till now; based on what I read I'd call it a failed US-wide attempt to standardize US collections (not international ones). Neat as it is, it's not free to access ($; why??), it's not used outside US(/Canada) and it's not used as standard by US booksellers or libraries, and it's anglocentric as noted in [0] (an alternative being Harvard–Yenching Classification, for Chinese books). Also that's disappointing you say that the states vary greatly in applying that segmentation. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Congress_Classification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Congress_Classifica...
  - dredmorbius 2y ago
    The LoC classifications are, so far as I'm aware, free from distribution restrictions as works of the US government under copyright, and to that extent it's legal to distribute them for free. However the LoC doesn't provide machine-readable data for free so far as I'm aware. You can acquire the entire Classification and Subject Headings as PDF files (also WordPerfect (!!!) and MS Word, possibly some other formats), though that needs some pretty complex parsing to convert to a structured data format. (I've not tried the WP files, though those might be more amenable to conversion.) As far was "why", presumably some misguided government revenue-generating and/or business-self-interest legislation and/or regulation, e.g., library service providers who offer LoC Class/SH data, who prefer not to have free competition. (I'm speculating, I don't know this for a fact, though it seems fairly likely.)
    - smcin 2y ago
      But you can't access Classification Web without a $$$ subscription plan! (from $375 for Single User up to $1900 for 26+ Concurrent Users). https://www.loc.gov/cds/ https://www.loc.gov/cds/ https://www.loc.gov/cds/classweb/ https://www.loc.gov/cds/classweb/ (Aaron Swartz would object. You can access US patent data for free, but not LoC Classification Web)
      - dredmorbius 2y ago
ilamont 2y ago
> a mixture of Baker & Tayler (book distributors) Having dealt with Baker & Taylor in the past, this doesn't surprise me in the least. It was one of the most technologically backwards companies I've ever dealt with. Purchase orders and reconciliations were still managed with paper, PDFs, and emails as of early 2020 (when I closed my account). I think at one point they even had me faxing documents in.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
  A bit tangential but one of my favorite early amzn stories is when a small group from Ingram (at the time, the other major US book distributor) came to visit us in person (they were not very far away ... by design). It was clear that they were utterly gobsmacked that a team of 3 or 4 people could have done what we have done in the time that we had done it. They had apparently contemplated getting into online retail directly, but saw two big problems: (a) legal and moral pushback from publishers who relied on Ingram just being a distributor (b) the technological challenge. I think at the time their IT staff numbered about 20 or so. They just couldn't believe what they were seeing. Good times (there weren't very many of those for me in the first 14 months) :)

dredmorbius 2y ago

What are you referring to as the LoC triple classification? I've spent quite some time looking at both the LoC Classification and the LoC Subject Headings. Sadly the LoC don't make either freely available in a useful machine-readable form, though it's possible to play games with the PDF versions. I'd been impressed by a few aspects of this, one point that particularly sticks in my mind is that the state-law section of the Classification shows a very nonuniform density of classifications amongst states. If memory serves, NY and CA are by far the most complex, with PA a somewhat distant third, and many of the "flyover" states having almost absurdly simple classifications, often quite similar. I suspect that this reflects the underlying statutory, regulatory, and judical / caselaw complexity. Another interesting historical factoid is that the classification and its alphabetic top-level segmentation apparently spring directly from Thomas Jefferson's personal library, which formed the origin of the LoC itself. For those interested, there's a lot of history of the development and enlargement of the Classification in the annual reports of the Librarian of Congress to Congress, which are available at Hathi Trust. Classification: <https://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/lcco/ https://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/lcco/> Subject headings: <https://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects.html https://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects.html> Annual reports: - Recent: <https://www.loc.gov/about/reports-and-budgets/annual-reports/ https://www.loc.gov/about/reports-and-budgets/annual-reports...> - Historical archive to ~1866: <https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000072049 https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000072049>

smcin 2y ago
Never knew about LoC book Classification till now; based on what I read I'd call it a failed US-wide attempt to standardize US collections (not international ones). Neat as it is, it's not free to access ($; why??), it's not used outside US(/Canada) and it's not used as standard by US booksellers or libraries, and it's anglocentric as noted in [0] (an alternative being Harvard–Yenching Classification, for Chinese books). Also that's disappointing you say that the states vary greatly in applying that segmentation. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Congress_Classification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Congress_Classifica...
- dredmorbius 2y ago
  The LoC classifications are, so far as I'm aware, free from distribution restrictions as works of the US government under copyright, and to that extent it's legal to distribute them for free. However the LoC doesn't provide machine-readable data for free so far as I'm aware. You can acquire the entire Classification and Subject Headings as PDF files (also WordPerfect (!!!) and MS Word, possibly some other formats), though that needs some pretty complex parsing to convert to a structured data format. (I've not tried the WP files, though those might be more amenable to conversion.) As far was "why", presumably some misguided government revenue-generating and/or business-self-interest legislation and/or regulation, e.g., library service providers who offer LoC Class/SH data, who prefer not to have free competition. (I'm speculating, I don't know this for a fact, though it seems fairly likely.)
  - smcin 2y ago
    But you can't access Classification Web without a $$$ subscription plan! (from $375 for Single User up to $1900 for 26+ Concurrent Users). https://www.loc.gov/cds/ https://www.loc.gov/cds/ https://www.loc.gov/cds/classweb/ https://www.loc.gov/cds/classweb/ (Aaron Swartz would object. You can access US patent data for free, but not LoC Classification Web)
    - dredmorbius 2y ago

ilamont 2y ago

> a mixture of Baker & Tayler (book distributors) Having dealt with Baker & Taylor in the past, this doesn't surprise me in the least. It was one of the most technologically backwards companies I've ever dealt with. Purchase orders and reconciliations were still managed with paper, PDFs, and emails as of early 2020 (when I closed my account). I think at one point they even had me faxing documents in.

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
A bit tangential but one of my favorite early amzn stories is when a small group from Ingram (at the time, the other major US book distributor) came to visit us in person (they were not very far away ... by design). It was clear that they were utterly gobsmacked that a team of 3 or 4 people could have done what we have done in the time that we had done it. They had apparently contemplated getting into online retail directly, but saw two big problems: (a) legal and moral pushback from publishers who relied on Ingram just being a distributor (b) the technological challenge. I think at the time their IT staff numbered about 20 or so. They just couldn't believe what they were seeing. Good times (there weren't very many of those for me in the first 14 months) :)