This message is from Arlyn Sherwood.------------------------Johnnie
 
 
-------------------------------------
 
 
 
>From: [log in to unmask]
>Date: Tue, 25 Nov 97 11:34:48 -0600
>Subject: Re: Marchive for maps -- request information
 
 
 
     Well-
 
     We classify all our federal document maps by SuDoc. We're the Illinois
     regional depository. The SuDoc number comes with the maps. Therefore I
     don't have to make up an LC G number. We're a closed stack library so
     everything the patron is looking for has to be done by online catalog
     anyway unless s/he is going through me. I'm the only map cataloger or
     reference librarian.
 
     I do catalog all the nautical charts, all the BLM's, and all the topo
     series, except the 1:24,000's, individually.
 
 
P.S. We don't get the map records from MARCIVE so I can enhance the OCLC
records, which of course the MARCIVE Map record subscribers don't get the
benfit of.
 
 
 
______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________
Subject: Re: Marchive for maps -- request information
Author:  Arlyn Sherwood at SOS08407
Date:    11/21/97 3:30 PM
 
 
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
1.  Classifying maps by SuDocs organization is idiotic in
my opinion.  For user and staff efficiency, maps should be
classed geographically.  All maps of a a given area
(whether they happen to be issued by a U.S. government
agency or not) should be shelved together.  For most
collections, LC's "G" schedule is the best choice to
accomplish that goal.
2.  You probably do NOT want to catalog each and every
topographic quadrangle (and other quad-based maps, such as
the BLM's mineral management series) as separate items.
Most libraries (for efficiency's sake) treat 7.5 minute
topos (or all USGS topo quads) as a single title, and
record sheets as "items" or "volumes" as one would do with
a journal volume.
3.  Be VERY careful in formulating the Marcive profile
to be sure you are getting copy for all titles you
want and -- perhaps more importantly -- to avoid
getting copy for those not needed.  It's easy to get
as a nasty surprise unwanted records (sometimes hundreds of
them, that then have to be deleted locally) for individual
sheets within a series or title.
 
 
On Wed, 22 Oct 1997 09:51:55 EDT "Joanne M. Perry"
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
 
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>      This is a request for information from J. Kohut at Portland State
>      University who is not on the list, please reply to him
>      ([log in to unmask]).
>
>      The catalogers at PSU are discussing plans to recon the map collection
>      using Marchive records with SuDoc classifications; currently the topo
>      maps are arranged alphabetically by state and quad name and the rest
>      of the collection is organized geographically (although I am not sure
>      if it is using LC). I get the impression that the catalogers are being
>      quite insistent about this and Mr. Kohut would appreciate information
>      which he can bring to the discussions which would help him counteract
>      their intentions. Of course, if anyone feels that SuDoc organization
>      would be an improvement he would like to hear that also.
>
>      Thank you.
>
>      Joanne Perry
>      Map Librarian, Oregon State University
>      [log in to unmask]
 
Phil Hoehn, Map Bibliographer
Branner Earth Sciences Library
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-2210
[log in to unmask]