ext_12800 ([identity profile] cerusee.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] cerusee 2009-04-20 03:12 pm (UTC)

Yes, and if I had any experience at all in museums, that might have occurred to me. XD

Hell, ISDB, which is a descriptive thing, not a classification thing, would be a better model than LCC. My prof made us write "self-ISDBs" last semester, to show how amazingly flexible it is--you really can describe anything with it, not just books. If you're mainly cataloging objects, not information resources, you need descriptive tools more than you need to worry about subject expression.

Ideally, you'd use a faceted classification with a good computer system--I mean, you'd still have to pick a shelf location, so somewhere along the line, you make a choice, but there's no reason not to switch around your citation order when it comes to searching.

For physical storage, I think I would go with "hand-held energy-based weapons" as a first choice--with blasters and laser guns and the like. But where to put those? They're related to hand-held projectiles and hand-held edged weapons or hand-held blunt instruments, but of course, they also belong to the category of "energy-based weapons" and "energy-based technologies."

A polyhierarchical thesaurus is definitely in order.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting