-------- Original Message --------
Subject:        Re: Question about 300 field for atlases
Date:   Mon, 21 Mar 2011 16:19:09 +0000 (GMT)
From:   A CARLUCCI <[log in to unmask]>
To:     Air Photo GIS Forum - Map LibrarianshipMaps <[log in to unmask]>



Dear Allison
I've been working on rare books lately, so have seen more double plate
illustrations than I was used to when cataloguing maps.
According to AACR2 rule 2.5B12, "If numbered pages or leaves are printed
on a double leaf ... give them as pages or leaves according to their
numbering. If they are unnumbered, count each double leaf as two pages."
This would suggest that your description should read [3], 79 p., [46]
leaves of plates (2 folded).
However, I would add that I find this sort of calculation unuseful for
the garden variety catalog user, and so I would usually add a note:
500 The plates consist of 21 double leaves and 2 folded double leaves.
I notice you say that the triple maps are not mounted on tabs, so it's
possible these would be considered just "folded plates" (if only one
edge of the plate is attached to the binding) rather than double plates
(where the fold--or middle--of the plate is attached to the binding).
It depends on how carried away you want to get, but I am increasingly
motivated by providing a description which is thorough enough to know if
something is missing at a later date.
I hope this helps.
April
April Carlucci
The Itinerant Map Catalog(u)er
--- On *Mon, 21/3/11, Angie Cope /<[log in to unmask]>/* wrote:


     From: Angie Cope <[log in to unmask]>
     Subject: Re: Question about 300 field for atlases
     To: [log in to unmask]
     Date: Monday, 21 March, 2011, 15:52

     ------- Original Message --------
     Subject: Re: Fwd: Question about 300 field for atlases
     Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 11:34:17 -0400
     From: Paige Andrew <[log in to unmask]
     <[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>>
     To: [log in to unmask]
     <[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
     <[log in to unmask]
     <[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>>



     Hi Allison,

     I'm not as good with this level of detail for the 300$a portion of a
     record for an atlas (in part because its based on book/monograph
     description) so I was hoping others would jump in to assist. I do know
     that there has been a number of rule interpretations for this part of
     the description over the years. From what you have given here, I think
     your 300$a is fine except the word "Atlas" should not be capitalized,
     and the comma deleted after "79". For your 300$b, if any of the
maps are
     multi-color that should be brought out here. And, as for the 300$c,
     delete the "(fol.)" at the end (and if you were to retain this the word
     "folded" is not listed in Appendix B of AACR2R as a word that can be
     abbreviated so it would not be abbreviated here or elsewhere though
     you'll find this and other words abbreviated under older cataloging
     rules).

     A couple of articles, with examples, that might be helpful to
     read/review if you haven't already are found in _Maps and Related
     Cartographic Materials: Cataloging, Classification and Bibliographic
     Control_ by the Haworth Information Press in 1999. All items in the
book
     were initially published in a special double theme issue of /Cataloging
     & Classification Quarterly/, Vol. 27, No. 1/2 and No. 3/4, 1999.

     For contemporary atlases see:

     Andrew Paige G. /Cataloging the Contemporary Printed Atlas/, pp.
147-164

     For early atlases see:

     Romero, Lisa and Nancy Romero. /Cataloging Early Atlases: A Reference
     Source/, pp. 265-284

     Keep in mind that these were written in the late 1990s and so some
     details have changed in the course of the past dozen years in terms of
     MARC and OCLC.

     Hope this helps...

     Paige

     On 3/18/2011 1:08 PM, Angie Cope wrote:
      > ----- Forwarded Message -----
      > From: "Allison Rich"<[log in to unmask]
     <[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>>
      > To:[log in to unmask]
     <[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
      > Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 11:38:20 AM
      > Subject: Question about 300 field for atlases
      >
      > Hello All:
      >
      > I have a question about physical descriptions for atlases.
      >
      > I have an atlas with 23 double plates, of which two have an
     additional folded section which makes it a triple folded map, with a
     sheet pasted on to the
      > left side of the double sheet. All are mounted on tabs except for
     these triple maps.
      >
      > Do you count these additonal leaves as pages so that they would
     make 48 p. + 2 p.
      > OR
      > 21 double maps + 2 triple maps.
      >
      > Right now my 300 field reads:
      >
      > 1 Atlas ([3], 79, p., [23] double leaves of plates (4 folded)) :
     ǂb ill., maps ; ǂc 54 cm. (fol.)
      >
      > Should this be altered any way?
      >
      > Thanks for your help,
      > ~Allison Rich
      >
      > --
      >
      > ********************************
      > "Outside of a dog, a book is probably man's best friend,
      > and inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. - Groucho Marx"
      >
      > Allison Rich
      > Catalogue Librarian
      > John Carter Brown Library
      > Providence, Rhode [log in to unmask]

<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
     ********************************
      >