-------- Original Message --------
Subject: SV: Re: Terminology question - "composite,atlas" or "atlas
factice".
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:24:57 +0200
From: Henrik Dupont <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
References: A<[log in to unmask]>
Here in Copenhagen at the Royal Library we have always used the term Atlas Factice for this kind of atlas, we have two very big ones one is in 55 vol. the other in 65 vol folio and then we have several smaller Atlas Factice
Henrik Dupont
Map Curator
But actually not the one cataloguing neither maps or atlases, this is done by librarians in our department
-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] På vegne af Maps-L Moderator
Sendt: 19. juni 2009 14:19
Til: [log in to unmask]
Emne: Re: Terminology question - "composite,atlas" or "atlas factice".
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Terminology question - "composite,atlas" or "atlas factice".
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:18:59 +0000 (GMT)
From: A CARLUCCI <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
The glossary of _Cartographic Materials, a Manual of Interpretation for
AACR2_, defines "Atlas factice" as "a composite work made up of a
selection of previously issued maps. It may be bound or loose-leaf." The
term "composite atlas" refers you back to "atlas factice."
I would agree that it might be difficult to reach a consensus were we to
hold a vote. There are differences in terminology between
librarians/curators and dealers, as well as between American and British
English, and in the UK I have certainly heard "composite atlas" but not
"atlas factice."
Anyone working with maps should have a copy of _Cartographic Materials_
at hand. Even if you are not catalog(u)ing to international standards,
it has a wealth of information about maps and their description.
Hope this helps.
April
April Carlucci
Itinerant Map Catalog(u)er
Both sides of the Atlantic
--- On *Thu, 18/6/09, Maps-L Moderator /<[log in to unmask]>/* wrote:
From: Maps-L Moderator <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Terminology question - "composite,atlas" or "atlas
factice".
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Thursday, 18 June, 2009, 7:18 PM
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Terminology question - "composite,atlas" or
"atlas factice".
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:39:06 -0000 (UTC)
From: [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]>
References: <[log in to unmask]
<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>>
I would be a bit surprised if you could get specific consensus on this.
There have been a couple of discussions on MapHist about this, one of
which is mentioned here:
http://mailman.geo.uu.nl/pipermail/maphist/2008-March/011579.html .
Joel Kovarsky
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Terminology question
> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:51:05 -0700
> From: [log in to unmask]
<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
> To: MAPS-L <[log in to unmask]
<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>>
>
>
> Hi there,
> Can anyone tell me which term is more commonly or appropriately
used in
> describing an atlas made up
> of a selection of individually issued or collected maps: "composite
> atlas" or "atlas factice".
>
> Thanks,
> Silvana
>
|
