-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: MAPS-L: Classifying a small map collection using LC?
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 12:05:12 -0500
From: David J. Bertuca <[log in to unmask]>
To: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum <[log in to unmask]>
hi Carolyn and all;
My first cataloging experience was back in 1983 doing original work on a
local history map collection. The maps were 90% on the same region. The
library used DEWEY for the rest of their collections. I suggested that they
file the maps by a call number sequence, but suggested that we use LC
instead of Dewey, because the call numbers would be long and repetitious,
and subject to mis-filing.
The local history collection was in Dewey and they agreed from past
experience that the numbers were hard to deal with (almost 100% of their
collection was on their city and vicinity).
LC worked fine and starting with it from the beginning was good as I could
build the catalog and make sure all the maps went together well. It was
also easier to show people how to locate maps in the collection too. I made
a guide with index maps showing the call number breakdown to assist anyone
afraid of LC, which also helped the staff there.
When I did the collection, I looked into a few other classification schemes
but in the end, LC had the best system for maps that need a call number (as
Mary said, USGS and other maps having a decent index don't really need a
call number--in fact, we tried that on one series just to see if it would
work and it was more work than it was worth).
So after cataloging maps there and later at UB, I am strongly in favor of
LC's schedule for maps and atlases. They organized "G" very well (I've
cataloged a variety of other formats and I can't say I enjoy some of the
other schedules as much).
David J. Bertuca, Map Librarian
225 Capen Hall
University at Buffalo
Buffalo, NY 14260-1672
716-645-2947 x229
[log in to unmask]
--On Thursday, January 11, 2007 8:04 AM -0600 Maps-L <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: MAPS-L: Classifying a small map collection using LC?
> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 07:32:07 -0500 (EST)
> From: Colleen Cahill <[log in to unmask]>
> To: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum
> <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
> Carolyn,
>
> A classification scheme for your collection, no matter how small, is a
> good idea. I have a few questions:
>
> -Does the rest of your Library use the LC Class system?
> -If so, Do you have access to Classification web?
> <http://classificationweb.net/>
> -Do you plan to catalog the maps?
>
> The LC Classification of maps is in the G schedule, numbers G1000 to
> G9999: numbers from G1000 to G3171 are for atlases and globes, then map
> numbers to the end. You can buy a paper copy of the G schedule, but if
> you are serious about using this schedule, I would recommend access to
> Classification Web because there are many, many (100,000's) geographic
> cutter tables that you will need to access. If your Library already uses
> Class Web, that would make this easier.
>
> The G schedule allows you to class the maps of the universe down to
> subsections of cities and everything between. The basic layout is
> geographic: maps begin with the Universe, then go through
> Celestial maps, the Moon and then the World (Earth). The pattern
> continues with the world divided by hemispheres, zones and regions, then
> by continents, then continental regions, then countries, their regions,
> provinces or states, and so on.
>
> An area is often represented by a range of numbers, for example, maps of
> North Carolina are G3900 to G3904. The Special Instructions for Tables of
> Subdivisions for Cartographic Materials
> <http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/class_g.pdf> gives more details on how
> these numbers are used, but in a nutshell:
>
> G3900 - General maps of North Carolina
> G3901 - Thematic maps of North Carolina
> G3902 - Regional maps of North Carolina
> G3903 - County maps of North Carolina
> G3904 - City maps of North Carolina
>
> Cutters are then added to further define the theme or place that the
> map is showing.
>
> I am giving this long-winded overview because there are a number of
> issues with using the LC Class schedule that you will need to consider.
> Having used the G Schedule for many years, I can say it is one of the most
> logical of the LC class schedules and (for me) it was no where near as
> confusing as the K or the H schedules.
>
> If you are cataloging the maps, you might find copy cataloging that
> already as the class number in the record and also your cataloging records
> could be shared by others. If you are just using the Class system to
> arrange the maps and have no plans to catalog them, you need to look at
> your acces to the G Schedule and how much it will cost. You don't say if
> you plan to grow this collection, which is another consideration on how
> much you want to spend.
>
> Hope this was useful and not too long. Let me know if I can clarify any
> points.
>
> Colleen
> Colleen R. Cahill | [log in to unmask]
> Digital Conversion Coordinator | (202)707-8540
> & Recommending Officer for | FAX (202)707-8531
> Science Fiction & Fantasy | Library of Congress
> These opinions are mine, Mine, Mine! | Washington, DC 20540-4652
>
>
>
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, Maps-L wrote:
>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Classifying a small map collection using LC?
>> Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 16:52:04 -0500
>> From: Carolyn Bowen <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> CC: Carolyn Bowen <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>> All,
>>
>> We have a small map collection (~20,000 maps) that is hidden away on a
>> lower level; the only entrance is through a stairway door just outside a
>> reference librarian's office. The collection is, for the most part,
>> uncataloged and underused. Maps are arranged by a locally devised scheme
>> based primarily on collating items alphabetically by geographic area.
>>
>> Due to the absorption of a significant collection, historically housed
>> elsewhere on campus, space is being reallocated. We are considering
>> moving the map collection to a section of the reference area on the
>> first floor.
>>
>> What would be the pros and cons of adopting LC-classification for the
>> maps? We are starting to catalog the maps and are trying to decide
>> whether classifying them using LC would be helpful to potential users.
>>
>> Carolyn Bowen
>> Multi-formats Cataloger
>> Jackson Library
>> University of North Carolina, Greensboro
>> P.O. Box 26170
>> Greensboro, NC 27402-6170
>>
>> e-mail: [log in to unmask]
>> telephone: 336-334-5781
>>
>
>
|
