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

Subject: Re: MAPS-L: Roman or Arabic numbers?
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005
From: Paige Andrew <[log in to unmask]>
To: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum <[log in to unmask]>


Good morning Phil!

Following Rule 1.1B1 in AACR2R, "Transcribe the title proper exactly as to
wording, order, and spelling, but not necessarily as to punctuation and
capitalization" I would recommend retaining the Roman numerals if that is
how it is on the maps themselves. In addition, and although I am not
positive that numbers can technically and accurately be called "script",
Rule 1.0E1 in AACR2R says that "In the following areas give information
transcribed from the item itself in the language and script (wherever
practicable) in which it appears there..." and the first area listed is
Title and statement of responsibility.

Even without these two rules and my interpretation of them in this
particular circumstance, it just seems the most common sense thing to do is
transcribe the numbers in the title as they are on the piece -- if in Roman
then transcribe it that way, if in Arabic then transcribe it that way.

Paige

At 08:58 AM 8/19/2005, you wrote:
>================================================
>MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L
>================================================
>
>Subject: Roman or Arabic numbers?
>Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005
>From: Philip Hoehn <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>I'm about to catalog some 25 online scans of maps covering various parts
>of the U.S.  They appear in an 1891-1895 atlas.  The maps have only the
>generic title: General topographic map sheet I, II, III, etc.
>
>A few of these are in OCLC.  Some of those records retain the Roman
>numerals while others have converted the sheet numbers to Arabic.  I
>couldn't see any specific instructions covering this situation in AACR2
>or _Cartographic Materials_.  Rules covering tangential matters
>unfortunately seem to point in both directions.
>
>Any recommendations on which it should be?
>
>General topographic map. /n Sheet III  /h [electronic resource]  or
>
>General topographic map. /n Sheet 3  /h [electronic resource]
>
>
>Philip Hoehn, Map Librarian
>San Francisco -- [log in to unmask]
>-----------------------------------
>Contractor for David Rumsey Collection:
>http://www.davidrumsey.com
>
>
>--


--