From the catalogs of babes

{September 10, 2009}   forever in blue jeans
mama jeans daddy jeans sissy jeans baby jeans

photo by aphasiafilms on flickr

 While I understand the DDC editorial committee’s explanation, I’d still class the Jean Genies: Travelling Pants project under the number for “jeans” in my library. Call me a rebel, but in a fashion library we don’t get a lot of patrons browsing the 021.7 section. We do, however, have lots of students interested in denim and jeans and what people are doing with those products.

It might be against the rules, but I’d rather class a material where it will get the most access and use over a “correct” classification that renders the material essentially invisible.

Dodie Gaudet says:

Classification is very specific to each library. You must consider your clientele first and the “rules” second. The classification number on a bib record is only a suggestion, a place to start. There is also a Library of Congress Classification number on the bib record, but you don’t use that. You should use whatever number works for YOUR library. Dodie

Ivy says:

Yes, Dodie, that was my exact point, and an oft-recurring theme of this blog. I like to illustrate practical, real-world examples applicable to the specific focus of the library where I work when they arise, rather than just speaking in esoteric theorectical terms.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

et cetera
%d bloggers like this: