3 ms·

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. Sa

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
      Pretty much my point. I should look into the terms/conditions for that.
      - smcin 2y ago
        People won't care why it isn't freely accessible, it's not going to displace ISBN (or other non-US classifications) without that; not even inside the US, and certainly not outside it. I'm actually genuinely surprised it isn't freely accessible; Aaron Swartz (RIP) might have gone to war over that, and might have won that war in the court of public opinion. Hey has anyone in the govt trained an LLM on it? Given title, author, keywords, abstract, etc. predict which LoC triple classification (or Dewey Decimal Classification, or Harvard–Yenching Classification, or Chinese Library Classification, or New Classification Scheme for Chinese Libraries (NCL in Taiwan)) a book would have? That would be neat, and a good way to proliferate its use instead of ISBN. (But the US govt would still assert copyright over the LoC classification.)
CRConrad 2y ago
> What are you referring to as the LoC triple classification? Lines of actually working code; lines of commented-out inactive code; lines of explanatory comments. HTH! Naah, gotcha, the other "LoC"... But only got it on about the third occurrence.

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
    Pretty much my point. I should look into the terms/conditions for that.
    - smcin 2y ago
      People won't care why it isn't freely accessible, it's not going to displace ISBN (or other non-US classifications) without that; not even inside the US, and certainly not outside it. I'm actually genuinely surprised it isn't freely accessible; Aaron Swartz (RIP) might have gone to war over that, and might have won that war in the court of public opinion. Hey has anyone in the govt trained an LLM on it? Given title, author, keywords, abstract, etc. predict which LoC triple classification (or Dewey Decimal Classification, or Harvard–Yenching Classification, or Chinese Library Classification, or New Classification Scheme for Chinese Libraries (NCL in Taiwan)) a book would have? That would be neat, and a good way to proliferate its use instead of ISBN. (But the US govt would still assert copyright over the LoC classification.)

CRConrad 2y ago

> What are you referring to as the LoC triple classification? Lines of actually working code; lines of commented-out inactive code; lines of explanatory comments. HTH! Naah, gotcha, the other "LoC"... But only got it on about the third occurrence.