================================================
MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L
================================================

Subject: Re: MAPS-L: General Material Descriptor (GMD)
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005
From: Philip Hoehn <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]

Adding the GMD "cartographic material" might be a good idea if one's
OPAC doesn't automatically display format type in a search results list.
  Otherwise it seems to me that staff time to add this subfield could be
spent more productively on other activities.


Philip Hoehn, Map Librarian
San Francisco -- [log in to unmask]
-----------------------------------
Contractor for David Rumsey Collection:
http://www.davidrumsey.com



-- "Angie Cope, AGSL" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
================================================
MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L
================================================


Subject: General Material Descriptor (GMD)
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005
From: Miriam Glanz <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]

Our University is getting ready to do full-scale cataloging records and
the cataloging department fired the question below off to me that I
thought I would pass on to the list for comment. Any comments and or
insight would be appreciated!



Why would a library make the decision to NOT use a GMD (general material
descriptor) for maps?  It seems to me it would be helpful to patrons to
see "cartographic material" just as they do "electronic resource" or
"microform" (et al.) when confronted by a long list of titles. Yet the
GMD is optional, and LC has opted NOT to add it to any cartographic
material.  I can understand not wanting to use it on atlases (many of
which I don't think should be cataloged as maps at all), because they're
very book-like.  Sheet maps, though, seem to be a different animal
altogether and I think should have the GMD added.



Miriam Glanz

Arizona State University Library Map Collection





--