Louise,
I went back and re-read the note regarding "charts" and reconsider my position. You're right, the intent here is most likely to use this for the kind of charts one finds accompanying a journal article or similar information source, as a way to illustrate statistics. That said, maps and atlases are "graphic representations of data" too! We would indeed use the f/g term Aeronautical charts for that kind of "chart", and then "Nautical charts" for those related to bodies of water.
Good question about "land surveys" and cadastral maps. I personally think that that is when this new f/g would be employed, with maps that show the outcome of a land survey, which would include the measurements of the land parcel and similar statistics and possibly show land ownership as well. But, what about those maps showing land use data/zones in the sense of planning for the future? (as opposed to land use or zoning maps that show existing or past scenarios) Wouldn't a survey have been part of the process of proposed future uses of land by a governing body? I can see the possibility of using both of these f/g terms on certain kinds of maps.
As for the Guidebooks term, I think I may have been misunderstood. I would not apply this to a tourist map itself -- my thinking is that if one is cataloging a tourist map that also includes an associated/accompanying text meant to further share information about sites, buildings, monuments, parks, etc. that a tourist might be interested in more deeply, "Guidebooks" could be added to the record as well as "Tourist maps". And in the case of atlases created for tourist use (this may be a streeeeetch as I'm not remembering anything falling into such a category) that might also contain lots of explanatory text of the aforementioned historic or cultural sites, monuments, parks, etc. wouldn't using "Guidebooks" be an assist? Of course, in such a case we already have "Atlases" as a f/g term so probably not!
Paige
----- Original Message -----
From: "Louise Ratliff" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Friday, December 5, 2014 12:57:18 PM
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] LC to approve "general" terms for LCGFT (some are carto-related)
Hi all,
I’ve looked at the lists and the scope notes, and I humbly disagree with Paige about the use of the term “charts.” The scope note specifically states that it is used for graphic representations of data. I think that the term we would use is “Aeronautical charts” which has a “UF Navigational charts.”
Regarding the term “land surveys,” how might this be different from “cadastral maps?” Would “land surveys” apply to maps that we would describe as about “land-use?” Might one possibly have a map that uses both of these terms?
Also, I’m not sure that “guidebooks” would ever be applied to resources cataloged as cartographic materials. I would probably use “tourist maps” for such things. Opinions, anyone?
Thanks, and happy Friday!
Louise
From: Maps-L: Discussion Forum for Maps, Air Photo, Map Librarianship, GIS, etc. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paige G. Andrew
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 10:51 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Fwd: [PCCLIST] LC to approve "general" terms for LCGFT (some are carto-related)
I am forwarding this to MAPS-L because as I reviewed the Tentative List of forthcoming f/g terms I discovered some that are related to cartographic resources that we catalogers need to be aware of, and add to any local lists that one might be keeping for use. They are:
Added Terms:
Charts (though it appears this is meant in the broader sense, the use note could encompass cartographic charts IMO)
Facsimiles
Land surveys
Tactile works
Existing Terms with Additions/Changes
Cartographic materials for people with visual disabilities (added the Broader Term of "Tactile works")
Gazetteers (added the Broader Term of "Reference works")
Other Added Terms That Might Apply in Specific Circumstances:
Census data
Guidebooks
Passenger lists (I'm thinking of these either accompanying a historical map/atlas, or a part of)
Postcards (i.e., for cartographic postcards)
I tried to be comprehensive here but may have overlooked one or two terms that might go in the "Other" category above. I hope this helps fellow catalogers (and maybe slightly is of interest to others?)
Paige
----- Original Message -----
From: "ANN W. COPELAND" < [log in to unmask] >
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 12:26:55 PM
Subject: Fwd: [PCCLIST] LC to approve "general" terms for LCGFT
FYI. Annie
----- Original Message -----
[This message is being sent to multiple distribution lists; please pardon any duplication. Feel free to forward it to other interested parties.]
Since early 2007, the Library of Congress has been developing Library of Congress Genre/Form Terms for Library and Archival Materials (LCGFT), whose terms describe what something is rather than what it is about , as subject headings do. In January 2015 the Policy and Standards Division (PSD) will approve approximately 175 “general” genre/form terms for inclusion in LCGFT. The terms describe works such as abstracts, dictionaries, periodicals, and yearbooks, which are not specific to a particular discipline, and also include some other terms that do not fall neatly into a particular discipline (e.g., Logic puzzles ; Passenger lists ).
The “general terms” project was a partnership undertaken by PSD and the ALA/ALCTS Subject Analysis Committee’s Subcommittee on Genre/Form Implementation, which formed the General Terms Working Group, and PSD thanks the members of the Working Group for their time and effort.
For more information on the project and the Tentative List of terms , please see http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/genre_form_general_terms.html .
The terms appear on Tentative List 1513, to be approved on January 12, 2015. PSD is requesting comments on the proposed terms; please email Janis L. Young at [log in to unmask] through January 9, 2015.
Janis L. Young
Policy and Standards Division
Library of Congress
|
