difference between subject.none and subject.other

[Jose Blanco]

I wonder if anyone could explain to me the difference between these
two metadata fields. What kind of values would you put in one as
compared to the other?

Thank you!
-Jose

[Jose Blanco]

Just to clarify my question a bit more:
The definition that I see in the metadata registry area for
subject.other makes reference to “Local controlled vocabulary”,
wondering how this is used (local to what?)

Thank you!

[Jorge Gustavo Spertino]

Hi José,

Regarding your question, I see the issue more or less like this:

I think it needs to be addressed in context. But the short answer, based on my understanding, would be: What this scope note means with respect to the dc.subject.other tag would be to recommend using that tag to assign terms taken from a local controlled vocabulary. That is, if the institution has developed a list of significant terms, which it uses to assign local descriptors for the representation of content in its documents.

Most institutions will not have a local controlled vocabulary, but many maybe yes.  

What could be the reason for this second case? For example, many institutions in very specific disciplinary fields have created their own lists of "relevant" terms for their content representation.     Or other institutions, throughout their history, have taken only a few terms from different thesaurus, taxonomies, or controlled vocabularies (as they have deemed appropriate for their particular disciplines) and integrated them into a single list. The resulting list could be called a local controlled vocabulary, as long as that list is used to extract representative terms from the content of a document in that institution.

Now, regarding its usefulness in software, having content representation elements in different tags can be used, for example, to create different search filters, if necessary, or even to exclude a particular tag from an export, for example.

It would have other possible uses besides providing conceptual clarity.

So, for example, I could have a digital object of a scientific article, with the following descriptive content metadata:

dc.subject    (keywords entered by the authors in the article)

dc.subject.other    (descriptors taken from the local controlled vocabulary)

dc.subject.elsst    (descriptors taken from this formal thesaurus)    https://thesauri.cessda.eu/elsst-5/en/

That's my main answer.

Returning to what I stated at the beginning, in my opinion, it would be good to approach it comprehensively in the following context: - the software and the dc tags that it will offer by default, - the standard being used as a basis for this use:
https://www.dublincore.org/specifications/dublin-core/dcmi-terms/
and understand that the case of element qualifiers (in this case dc.subject) allows the creation of new qualifiers (which continues after the base field) as long as it is relevant and does not contradict an existing qualifier, formally existing within the standard.

I have designed an application profile within a specific context, adding qualifiers for the subject field, along with its scope notes, but I don't know how useful it would be to you. Just ask me if you have any questions, and I'll send it to you.

Regards, Jorge

--
All messages to this mailing list should adhere to the Code of Conduct: https://www.lyrasis.org/about/Pages/Code-of-Conduct.aspx
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DSpace Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dspace-communi...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dspace-community/CAK%3DKc-svOcWpn7xGmvw7azUQXJB-Oqg2%2BLkNqBPY-c7AR3grwg%40mail.gmail.com.