----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Maps People
  In our preparations for loading Marcive, we are dealing with a lot
of minute details.  One of these details deals with maps.  Right now,
we have all kinds of locations for various groups of maps.
Topographic, nauticals, national forest maps, and other major series
maps are filed together with the items in the series.  We also have a
set of "Miscellaneous" GPO maps under SuDocs Classification--sort of
a split subset of maps we received that we don't have any rules for
(as I said--miscellaneous).  I would prefer to classify these items,
add an 099 field to the marcive record and put all of the
miscellaneous maps together in a single area.  However, our head of
cataloging does not agree.
 
My reasoning is:
 
1.  Makes the collection easier to organize.
 
2.  Makes the collection easier for patrons to use, because they
won't have to look several places for maps on a single topic.
 
3.  Since most of the other maps in our collection are classified and
indexed on DBASE (a local solution because the maps are not
cataloged), having a few full records in the database would lead
patrons to the other maps on the same topic (which would incidentally
be filed with the maps with the edited Marcive Records).
 
Can anyone comment on these plans, and give me some additional,
practical reasons for or against these plans?  Does anyone just file
by SuDocs and ignore LC?
 
Sorry to say this, but I need your reasons by tommorrow (Wednesday,
May 4, 1994) at 3:00 PM.  You can either reply to the list or to me.
I am sure that a discussion of this topic on the list would be of
interest to others.
 
Linda Zellmer
[log in to unmask]