--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 10:44:24 -0500
From: Patrick McGlamery <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: RE: #38 again <fwd>
Sender: Patrick McGlamery <[log in to unmask]>



Marcel, et al;

Prof. Keller does indeed make some valid observations.  As I reread the
article again this weekend, it became clearer that Keller's attention is
primarily on storage and service.  What he overlooks is the systems nature
of maps and spatial data.  That is, the map library is a part of an
information system that responds to the perceived needs of the user by
determining what part of the Library's operating budget is for maps, staff
and equipment.

Before the information (map or data) can be stored or serviced it must be
acquired.  Maps do not just appear in the drawers of map libraries.  They
must be purchased or negotiated for.  In the US the Federal Depository
Program worked out 70+ years ago has dug a deep channel which has filled our
libraries with US maps.  Though the channel has become a trickle lately, it
is still viable... or was until 9/11.  In the States there has been a move
to cut back access to digital geodata.  Additionally, more monies are spent
at the local governmental level, where the data are more timely and more
detailed.  This movement has been noted by the USGS with its National Map
program.  Rarely do research libraries have a depository arrangement with
local governments. If we do, how do we share it up and out?  Much of what we
do as map librarians has always been to build collections of geographic
information.  When that geographic information became digital it got a whole
lot harder.

Purchasing copyrighted data for a distributed user community is extremely
difficult.  Most geodata producers and publishers don't get the multi-user
nature of libraries.  They are selling single-use "packets" of information
and we are trying to provide spatial information as a utility to an
ambiguous user community.  The negotiation is difficult, though not
impossible.  Authentication services allow us to limit use to data when
necessary, but getting overwhelmed systems departments to invest in
transitioning these geodata publishers is not easy.

Map libraries tend to be marginal operations in libraries, rarely getting
the administrative attention they need.  The ARL GIS Project of the early
90's made a difference, in that it got the attention of administration and
provided software, hardware and training.  Often that is where it stopped,
but it did have an effect of heightening awareness in the community.  Those
libraries that extended the notion of GIS beyond TIGER and Census and began
to build digital collections have positioned themselves well.  Those that
simply used the ARL Project to get through a difficult government document
format might have missed the boat.

Most Of the academic collections Keller points to have strong partnerships
with faculty.  In these partnerships there is a respect for skills and a
ready sharing of resources.  Libraries and librarians are written into
grants and are active investigators.  Training, hardware and software
continue to come to these libraries, as well as talented graduate student
workers who bring their passion and intellect to the problems of acquiring,
describing, storing and making accessible digital spatial data in a library
environment.  In these map libraries 'active partnering' has ameliorated the
marginal nature of map libraries.  Often map libraries are the leaders in
these libraries of a new way of operating.  The librarian and the scholar
are working together in new and exciting ways; and reducing the impact on
the Library's budget.

The users of maps and digital geospatial data will never deliver the numbers
that the users of Lexus-Nexus or Infotrac do, nor will they have the cache
that the users of Medline or ABI/Inform have.  I believe that we will have
to work more closely, and more co-equally, with partners.  This means that
academics need to reach out and share grant budgets, writing in equipment
and subsidizing data acquisitions in exchange for the skill map librarians
have; and librarians need to hone their skills of cataloging/metadata,
service and preservation/archiving.  As we see new librarians emerge with
GIS certificates, I suspect we will see more effective garages with new and
shiny tools.

If there is a lesson to learn it is that we are dealing with information,
not maps.  We always were, but transitions put that into glaring relief.
Geodata, in paper or digital form is what we are all dealing in.

Patrick McGlamery

-----Original Message-----
From: Johnnie Sutherland [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 5:11 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: #38 again <fwd>


--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 15:05:06 -0500
From: Marcel Fortin <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: #38 again <fwd>
Sender: Marcel Fortin <[log in to unmask]>



Patrick et. al.

I have to admit to being encouraged by Professor Keller's article
but I did find myself disagreeing with alot of points made.  It
is indeed encouraging, as you say in your message Patrick, that a
user has taken the time to write about the map library. At the
same time, map librarians should make it clear that we do have
the vision and that we already know what needs to change. We just
need the support to do it.

Our struggle is not in creating or having a vision. I believe our
vision is in place, our intentions are also there. We just need
the right people in our corner to help us. This is exactly where
faculty members can come in and help. We need their support to
convince others of the vision we already have. But we need them
to understand us at the same time. We have the expertise and
desire, and we know our role as educators just as we know what
needs to be done. We need money and helping hands along the way.
But to be able to find these things, administrators and faculty
members must understand what goes on in thes libraries.

I think this is part of the problem I had with the article. There
are some assumptions that are made about map librarians and what
we do.  This is in part an indication of the age-old problem of
image and lack of understanding of what librarians do and where
we stand in the big picture. Professor Keller mentions that map
librarians should be encouraged to :

"- conduct locational searches;
- consult in business geographics and other geographic
information analysis;
- assisst with navigation and vacation planning;
- assist in housing searches;
- teach classes in geographic information related subjects;
- consult in cartographic communication
- and offer map design and production services;
- or offer assistance with the interpretation and understanding
of space and place?"

I don't know about all map librarians, but this describes my job
quite closely and i'm sure it describes my predecessor's job when
she started in this position in the 1960's.

On the same note, Professor Keller also describes on a few
occasions the main role of the traditional map library as being a
place to store paper maps. If this were so, there would never
have been a need for map librarians. You would have just needed
someone to shelve them. As a professional librarian I see myself
as an educator and the maps in my drawers or the gis datasets in
my computer simply as tools and resources for me to do my job
with. When someone comes in to use one of my tools, they can use
it alone or with my help, but never is the item in isolation as a
preserved artifact. That is the museum's role, not my library's
role. In other words, I know what tools I need to do my job and I
always try and get whatever that tool's format is in, paper or
digital. There is no vision requirement there. And for the
record, there are still many many users who wish to use the paper
maps. Sometimes, the ones with true vision want to use both paper
and digital copies!

The final point I'd like to make is that there is an assumption
in Professor Keller's article that map librarians can decide the
outcome of the map library and its future and can create the
modern version of it if we really put our minds to it. I don't
know very many map librarians who wouldn't love to get the latest
technological tools and data to help their patrons.
Unfortunately, rare is it that the map librarian is the
decision-maker in the grand scheme of the overall library
institution.  We struggle today for the power to purchase more
datasets and more powerful computers just as I'm sure we used to
struggle for money to buy more maps and finish off a map series.
We do not decide overnight that we will now transform our
libraries into GIS centres. Budgets have to be justified and
administrators have to be convinced. And that is where our
struggle lies and here is where faculty members and librarians
must form a bond together. As the good-old French-Canadian saying
goes "Pass me the puck, I'll score some goals".

Marcel Fortin
GIS/Map Librarian
University of Toronto
[log in to unmask]

Johnnie Sutherland wrote:
>
> --- Begin Forwarded Message ---
> Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 17:17:38 -0500
> From: Patrick McGlamery <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: RE: #38 again <fwd>
> Sender: Patrick McGlamery <[log in to unmask]>
>
> Dear Alice;
>
> Bless you for going back and being thoughtful.
>
> I have admit to some of the same feelings after reading the article.  But
> let's look at it another way.  Mr. Keller has taken the time to write a
> thoughtful, articulate commentary on the state of the map library FROM THE
> USER'S POINT OF VIEW.  Let us remember that NACIS is a multi-whatever
bunch
> who all care passionately about maps.  And Mr. Keller, as a map library
> user, has given this a lot of thought, and cares enough to put it down on
> paper and share.  I daresay he has stated, though not as a librarian, some
> of our deepest fears.  It deserves a careful reading.
>
> Can we parse his article into a number of themes and comment,
collectively,
> on them?
>
> Patrick
>
--- End Forwarded Message ---
--- End Forwarded Message ---