-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: subject cataloging -- Maps, Tourist heading
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 12:47:16 -0400
From: Grabach, Kenneth A. Mr. <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
References:
<[log in to unmask]>
<[log in to unmask]>
Thank you, Nancy, for the reply below. Thanks also go to Katherine
Rankin and to Jimmie Lundgren for your helpful replies.
Like Katherine, I believe I had seen the announcement, but this was the
reminder. When one is doing additional duties, and not cataloging only,
it becomes a challenge to remember a single change. I am dismayed to
find that the effective date precedes my use of the older form for
several maps. In these, OCLC Connexion allowed me to use the old form
when I controlled the subject heading. This continued through last
week. It was not until yesterday that
651 $v Maps, Tourist was refused as a valid heading. So I didn't
investigate until yesterday. I have not been in the habit of using
genre headings. It will now be necessary to add an additional heading,
so that all maps with tourist information are retrieved. I am keen to
see what gets done with
650 Roads $z [location] $v Maps. We had to change this one from 651
[place] $v Road maps several years ago.
Ken Grabach <[log in to unmask]>
Maps Librarian Phone: 513-529-1726
Miami University Libraries
Oxford, Ohio 45056 USA
-----Original Message-----
From: Maps, Air Photo, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Angie Cope
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 9:55 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: subject cataloging -- Maps, Tourist heading
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: [log in to unmask]
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2010 12:34:11 PM
Subject: Re: subject cataloging -- Maps, Tourist heading
Ken --
It has to do with LC's Sept. 1 implementation of a new subject structure
for cartographic materials records, incorporating the use of form/genre
terms in 655 fields, with simplified 651 subdivisions $vMaps. See
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/cartographic4.pdf. There was a reminder
about this on Maps-L a while back, but I have to admit that your message
was what really reminded me. (Thank you!) So for your map, for example, I
believe you would use
651 0 Nova Scotia $v Maps..
and
655 0 Tourist maps.
About the conflicting information you are getting, perhaps that is because
it will take OCLC and local systems a while to completely implement this
change and get all the established headings in harmony with it.
Nancy
Nancy A. Kandoian
Map Cataloger
The Lionel Pincus and Princess Firyal Map Division
Stephen A. Schwarzman Building
The New York Public Library
5th Ave. & 42nd St.
New York, NY 10018-2788
[log in to unmask]
phone 212-930-0586, fax 212-930-0027
subject cataloging -- Maps, Tourist heading
Angie Cope
to:
MAPS-L
09/07/2010
12:22 PM
Sent by:
"Maps, Air Photo, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship"
<[log in to unmask]>
Please respond to "[log in to unmask]"
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: "Kenneth A. Mr. Grabach" <[log in to unmask]>
To: "Air Photo Maps, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship"
<[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2010 10:46:50 AM
Subject: subject cataloging -- Maps, Tourist heading
Has the form subdivision for Maps, Tourist changed recently? While doing
some subject authority checking on a new edition of a tourist map of Nova
Scotia, I am getting some conflicting information on the subject heading
and form subdivision.
Authority records appear for various places, with subdivision, Maps,
Tourist. I can control the authority for Nova Scotia Maps, but not for the
one I have been using. Some conflicting information shows up when searching
authority records for Tourism, Maps, and for Tourist maps. Can anyone shed
light on this?
Ken Grabach <[log in to unmask]>
Maps Librarian Phone: 513-529-1726
Miami University Libraries
Oxford, Ohio 45056 USA
|
