how to best organise a large community "important" books library?

Zenaan Harkness zen at
Sat May 27 13:08:31 PDT 2017

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 06:33:42AM -0700, Razer wrote:
> On 05/26/2017 11:11 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> > The main bit I don't like about Library of Congress, Dewey and other
> > "physical library" categorization schemes is that they are evidently
> > "optimized" for physical storage, and so they arbitrarily group
> > categories which are not directly related.
> No they don't.

Sure, you can say "G", the "Geography, Anthropology, and Recreation"
is a category of related topics, but some people want these
categories in separate categories, not in the same category.

And then you can say "oh, but inside G you've got sub-categories" -
well, that's the point - we don't have to limit our top level
categories to 26 letters of the alphabet, in the world of file
systems and folders.

But we can do that as well.

We can have multiple indices of different types, it's just digital
after all.

(May be there really is no physical correlation/ optimisation going
on with LOC classification, if that's what you're trying to say -
either way it's a wood for the trees on an irrelevant point.)

More information about the cypherpunks mailing list