-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: Classification for Hong Kong?
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 10:10:05 -0400
From: Grabach, Kenneth A. Mr. <[log in to unmask]>
To: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum <[log in to unmask]>
This question is a bit easier to answer for me and other small or medium-sized map collections than for large ones such as David's. I found it no challenge to reclassify these maps and some similar ones, because the older maps I had were not already classified, or were too few in number to make reclassification a challenge.
I can understand the difficulty where there may be large sets of topographic sheets requiring much time to change the labels.
On the subject of reclassification of Hong Kong, be sure to note that there is more than one applicable classification:
Hong Kong (Special Administrative Region) is classed as an administrative division, G7823.H45.
Hong Kong city is classed as a city, G7824.H5. Kowloon, another city within the region, is also classed, G7824.K6. Victoria, once the name for the city we know now as Hong Kong, is also G7824.H5.
The former Portuguese city of Macao became Macau (Special Administrative Region) when it was incorporated into China. This is also an administrative division, G7823.M3; it is no longer classed as G7945. There is no city classification in G7824.
Generally on the subject of reclassification, it is a challenge, but not doing it becomes a larger challenge for users and staff. If newer items are classified with the current number, but older materials are under a different classification and thus a different call number, there is confusion to find all a user might need. It can be a challenge for staff trying to assist a user. It seems to me that if classification of a map collection is useful, than it is good customer service to ensure that the maps covering a single geographic entity get the same classification number.
Ken Grabach <[log in to unmask]>
Maps Librarian Phone: 513-529-1726
Miami University Libraries
Oxford, Ohio 45056 USA
-----Original Message-----
From: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Maps-L
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 9:09 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Classification for Hong Kong? <fwd>
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Classification for Hong Kong?
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 19:42:08 -0400
From: Matthew Parsons <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
I've been working on a bunch of Hong Kong maps (sheets and sets) and was
pondering this same classification question posted here several years ago
(see below). Except now it seems to be G7823. Has LC gone ahead and
reclassed their G7940s to G7823? Has anyone else? David, did you ever get
an answer to this question (granted it was seven years ago, so if you don't
remember that's okay...).
-Matt Parsons, Map Librarian, UW Seattle.
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 16:28:31 -0500, Johnnie Sutherland
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
>Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 16:04:09 -0500
>From: David Cobb <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Classification for Hong Kong?
>Sender: David Cobb <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
>Map Catalogers -
>
>We just received a new map of Hong Kong, fortunately printed out an
>existing OCLC record, and as we were about to complete the map processing I
>looked and realized the classification didn't seem right. God knows why
>(maybe we have recently photographed too many maps with a G7940
>classification) but I remembered G7940 and was surprised to see G7824! Has
>a decision been made by LC G&M to reclassify. We have almost completed our
>reclassification of our Russian collection, our German collection, have
>just begun our Yugoslavian collection, and I "guess" Hong Kong is next?
>
>David Cobb
>Harvard Map Collection
>--- End Forwarded Message ---
|
