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

Subject: RE:      MAPS-L: TOWN division visual guide
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005
From: Curtis, Gwen  <[log in to unmask]>
To: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum <[log in to unmask]>

The state maps in the older editions of the Rand McNally Commercial
Atlas and Marketing Guide show the county and town boundaries. -- Gwen
Curtis

-----Original Message-----
From: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Angie Cope, AGSL
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 2:32 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: MAPS-L: TOWN division visual guide

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


Subject: MAPS-L: geographic s.h. questionn TOWN s.h.
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005
From: Nat Case <[log in to unmask]>
To: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum <[log in to unmask]>


This variation in sub-county administration is something I've been oddly
fascinated by for a while. Has anyone seen (or made) a visual guide to
these subdivisions? I think it might be an interesting map, perhaps
shading all the different named divisions...

Nat

>By the way ... the question has been sufficiently answered. Additional
>comments are welcome - but the main issue has been addressed. Thanks
all.
>================================================
>MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L
>================================================
>
>Subject: Re: MAPS-L: geographic s.h. question
>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005
>From: David J. Bertuca <[log in to unmask]>
>To: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum
><[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>Hello Beth and all;
>
>Here at University at Buffalo, that was a continuing topic among the
>catalogers. I have been planning on adding a short clarification note
>on our website for map cataloging and just haven't gotten to it. The LC

>Map Cataloging Manual has a definition and without having it in hand, I

>can give you a basic description. For some states, there are distinct
>towns and larger municipalities that are either called "townships" or
just "towns"
>that have the same name as the town (smaller unit) within their
boundaries.
>
>In NY and PA (which we've cataloged a lot of), there are many instances

>of this. An example below illustrates:
>
>3804 B32        Bath (N.Y.)
>3804 B323       Bath (N.Y. : Town)
>
>There is a town called Bath, and within its limits there is "the" town
>of Bath (it could have been the "village" or other official name). Bath

>(N.Y.) is the urban area called "Town of Bath" but it is situated
>within a township called "Bath" which gets the heading Bath (N.Y. :
Town).
>
>The urban center is the first heading above, while the township is the
>2nd version, with the qualifier "town."
>
>In NY the word "Township" is not used so the headings do not use it.
>There are some states (LC lists these in the Manual) that do use
>"Township" as their qualifier.
>
>This of course is the really short version of this. You can almost
>always follow this and be correct as generally, the "Town" qualifier
>represents the larger entity, not the smaller.
>
>IF the township does not have a town within its boundaries that uses
>the same name, then you can just use the "[townname] (N.Y.)" without
>further qualifier. that of course makes it a little more exciting to
>work on and a gazetteer and atlas is very helpful. Also, LC has placed
>its G schedule online and has included all the town/township/village,
>etc. entries for U.S. towns and cities. that is very helpful too.
>
>the big thing is to be consistent when doing this, so that if later you

>realize that you did them the opposite way from earlier works or
>in-house policy decisions, you can at least know you did them all the
same.
>
>I know for example, that some of our catalogers were interpreting it
>that the larger township was the unqualified heading while the smaller
>urban center was given the "Town" qualifier. and an argument can be
>made for both ways. The above is based on LC's interpretation and how
they follow it.
>
>clear as mud, I know. I hope it was descriptive enough.
>
>David J. Bertuca, Map Librarian
>University at Buffalo
>
>--On Thursday, October 20, 2005 12:49 PM -0500 "Angie Cope, AGSL"
><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>================================================
>>MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L
>>================================================
>>Subject: geographic s.h. question
>>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005
>>From: Beth Cox <[log in to unmask]>
>>Reply-To: OnLine Audiovisual Catalogers list
>><[log in to unmask]>
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>
>>Hi, all.  I'm hoping someone out there can answer a question from a
>>newbie map cataloger.  Today I was cataloging a map of a portion of
>>New Hampshire.  As per our local practice, I was adding individual
>>subject headings for each town that had a separate street map on the
>>verso of the main map.  While searching the authority file in OCLC, I
>>found that a number of these towns had two headings: for example,
>>"Meredith (N.H.)" and "Meredith (N.H. : Town)".  I have not noticed
>>this with towns in other states.  And as far as I can tell, both
>>headings are listed as valid in the authority file.  Which is correct?

>>And if one is correct and one isn't, why are both listed?
>>
>>Thanks so much, in advance, for your help!
>>
>>Beth
>>
>>
>>Elizabeth J. Cox
>>Special Formats Librarian
>>Morris Library, Mailcode 6632
>>Southern Illinois University Carbondale
>>605 Agriculture Drive
>>Carbondale, IL 62901
>>
>>Phone: 618-453-5594
>>Fax: 618-453-3452
>>E-mail: [log in to unmask]
>>
>>"The cats I like best are the cats who take chances" -- Thelonious
>>Monk
>>
>>--
>>
>
>
>
>David J. Bertuca
>[log in to unmask]
>
>
>--


--
Nat Case
Hedberg Maps, Inc

--


--