In thinking of the goals of our project, the Ka Wai Hāpai team has taken inspiration from various controlled and specialized vocabularies. We thought it would be helpful to provide some background for the goals of controlled vocabularies overall, and the uses of specialized vocabularies for a variety of audiences.
How “universal” can you be?
Controlled vocabularies, such as the Library of Congress Subject Headings were created to serve library user needs, and to make materials easier for users to discover. However, anticipating what and how users will search, as well as what aspects of the material will interest them often means making predictions and assumptions about who these users are and what is worthy of study. Librarians, like their users, are people with individual biases and knowledge gaps, while institutions suffer from these same issues at a higher level. This, and the impossibility of anticipating the particular needs of the diverse communities and identities that make up library communities, means that there is often a mismatch between the needs of different audiences. The vocabulary that aims to be “universal” will always sacrifice some specificity.
Who is your user?
One way to change this outcome is to reframe the question of who library users are. If we are speaking to a specific set of people, instead of imagining a default user, how would our process change and what terminology would we use to speak to them? This is what many specialized vocabularies try to do.
Specialized vocabularies may be created for a variety of reasons. Perhaps the standard that you are using doesn’t have the specificity necessary to your users, perhaps it uses unfamiliar, alienating or harmful language, or perhaps the resources in your collection are formatted or structured differently than the ones it was meant to serve. In these cases, a specialized vocabulary may be more helpful for the users you actual have. Specialized vocabularies, as opposed to more “universal” ones such as the LCSH, do not seek to create terms for all areas of knowledge, but only those concerned with a specific topic or of interest to a specific community. Because their aims are limited, they are freer to make decisions about how to serve users without enacting standards that must be followed by those outside of the community.
How can you improve?
Some examples of vocabularies that we have taken inspiration from are the Homousarus, and the Ngā Upoko Tukutuku (the Māori Subject Headings). Both of these projects provide terminology for and about a specific audience, and are therefore able to craft their language and structure according to the community’s understanding of itself. Both also model community and consultation in term creation. The opportunity to receive feedback and clarification is invaluable. Another important consideration is that understanding and language change over time, so thinking long-term about how to change or add to a controlled vocabulary is important. These are all things that we are thinking about in creating the structure and terminology for our controlled vocabulary and planning how it will expand in the future.
