1
Consultation on Subject Indexing and
standards applied by the British Library
Classification
Contents
The scope and key findings of the project .............................................................................................. 1
Aims .................................................................................................................................................... 1
Scope ................................................................................................................................................... 2
Methodology....................................................................................................................................... 2
Outcomes ............................................................................................................................................ 2
DDC ................................................................................................................................................. 2
Potential benefits of adopting Abridged DDC:................................................................................ 2
RISKS and issues .............................................................................................................................. 2
FAST................................................................................................................................................. 2
Potential benefits of adopting FAST: .............................................................................................. 2
RISKS and issues .............................................................................................................................. 3
Recommendations .............................................................................................................................. 3
Your Response .................................................................................................................................... 4
Further Information ................................................................................................................................ 4
FAST..................................................................................................................................................... 4
Abridged DDC ...................................................................................................................................... 4
The scope and key findings of the project
A broad-based review of the subject and classification schemes used on British Library records began
in late 2014.
The review was undertaken in response to a number of drivers including:
● An increasing demand on available resources due to the rapidly expanding digital publishing
arena, and continuing steady state in print publication patterns
● Increased demands on metadata to meet changing audience expectations
Aims
The aims of the review were to
• to seek efficiencies in the application of subject indexing and classification
FAST/Dewey Review Group, April 2015
2
• to evaluate opportunities for extending the application of subject indexing and classification
standards to resources that are currently excluded
Scope
The scope of the study was
● to compare the efficiency of assigning Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) with that
of assigning FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology), and Dewey Decimal
Classification with Abridged Dewey. A further alternative, “Broad Dewey”, was ruled out of
scope.
FAST is a faceted version of LCSH. In principle the metadata should be quicker to apply and more
adaptable than traditional LCSH strings.
Abridged Dewey is a simplified version of DDC which avoids extensive number building. Broad
Dewey is similar in concept, but training documentation is lacking.
Methodology
A small team of cataloguers trialled the schemes on a range of publications in various languages over
four months.
Outcomes
The project identified potential benefits and risks of adopting FAST and/or Abridged Dewey .
DDC
Potential benefits of adopting Abridged DDC:
• Efficiency
o Abridged DDC is quicker to apply
o Collection areas that currently have no classification could benefit from Abridged
without the overhead of time required to apply Full DDC
RISKS and issues
o Full DDC is required for several large scale BL functions, including BNB and Open
Access collections
o Abridged DDC is accessed through WebDewey, there are no potential savings in
terms of subscription
FAST
Potential benefits of adopting FAST:
• Efficiency
o FAST is quicker to apply.
o Searching is quicker in FAST than LCSH because all facets are in one file, from topics
to events to personal and corporate names to places.
o An LCSH to FAST batch conversion tool is available through MARCEdit.
o Training overhead significantly reduced
• Discovery
o FAST is better adapted to online display
o FAST uses terms not strings
FAST/Dewey Review Group, April 2015
3
o
o
•
•
Form/Genre fully implemented in FAST
Potential to extend application to unclassified/un-indexed collections
Economy
o Free FAST Web tool.
o FAST authority file can be downloaded free from the internet as an XML file.
o No Cataloger Desktop subscription required
o Continuity with past practice and easy transition from current standards,
 FAST vocabulary terms same as LCSH and LC/NACO Authority File
 FAST has a full thesaural structure
Sustainability
o FAST is supported by OCLC. OCLC has assigned FAST to records in World Cat that
contained LCSH.
o Many libraries are already using FAST for particular projects, notably on digital
collections, and contributing to its refinement and development as well as record
exchange.
o FAST is independent of coding, but can be expressed using the same MARC tagging
as LCSH
RISKS and issues
• Sustainability
o FAST is currently maintained as an OCLC research project, not a service. It is not
clear whether or when FAST may become a service.
• Discovery
o Loss of precision: faceting breaks the association between terms inherent in an
LCSH string, which may result in some false drops being returned.
 For example: the chronological facet 1800-1899 might potentially refer to
any or all of the topical facets Unemployment, Unemployed and
Homelessness, appearing unlinked in the same record.
• Efficiency
o Documentation of local policy decisions to compensate for lack of formal guidance
o Resistance to perceived dumbing down
• Implementation costs
o System configuration is needed to display FAST terms correctly
o Reskilling will also be needed. For staff familiar with LCSH, this will be minimal;
fuller training will be required for staff with no background in subject application.
Recommendations
The Library is consulting with stakeholders concerning the potential impact of these proposals. No
firm decisions have yet been taken regarding either of these standards.
FAST
1. The British Library proposes to adopt FAST selectively to extend the scope of subject
indexing of current and legacy content.
2. The British Library proposes to implement FAST as a replacement for LCSH in all current
cataloguing, subject to mitigation of the risks identified above, in particular the question
of sustainability.
FAST/Dewey Review Group, April 2015
4
DDC
3. The British Library proposes to implement Abridged DDC selectively to extend the scope
of subject indexing of current and legacy content.
Your Response
Please give us your views by completing the short survey at:
https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/YPSDPFY
Further Information
FAST
The full database of FAST headings can be found at http://fast.oclc.org/searchfast/
Links to examples of FAST in records in Explore the British Library are below: (Select Details to
see the labelled display and MARC display to review the coding).
Prestolonaslednikova smrt
La monoparentalidad masculina en España
Zeiden, im Januar
Hans-Dietrich Genschers Außenpolitik
Abridged DDC
Information about Abridged DDC can be found at http://www.oclc.org/dewey.en.html.
Access to Abridged DDC is via a print volume – available from OCLC, or via a WebDewey subscription
(single subscription for both Full and Abridged DDC).
FAST/Dewey Review Group, April 2015