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

Subject: Re: MAPS-L: General Material Descriptor (GMD)
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005
From: Paige Andrew <[log in to unmask]>
To: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum <[log in to unmask]>


Miriam,

Must be the change of weather or something, maybe a new "Fall ailment" or
something, since cataloging questions are popping up left and right!
Couldn't resist answering to this because I, and my map cataloging team
members here at PSU, also think it very appropriate to use the GMD for
maps, it is helpful to our patrons! Especially in a display list of items
with a similar or the same title, i.e., a title list where most everything
is "United States" or at least begins with "United States" and has one or
two other words following at most. Well, the bottom line is anyone can
add/use the GMD to or in their local records if they so choose. The
sticking point is this: LC chose NOT to use the GMD many years ago, and
since that is LC practice then OCLC has made it a "rule" that when creating
original records to go on WorldCat we are not allowed to use the GMD for
maps "cartographic material" (however, if its appropriate to use
"electronic resource" for an item that is cataloged as a cartographic item
and is in an electronic format, this is acceptable). So, I agree with your
cataloging department's query about "why not?" use the GMD on a personal
level. But, I do follow OCLC's request on a professional level.

The comment about "I can understand not wanting to use it on atlases (many
of which I don't think should be cataloged as maps at all), because they're
very book-like" struck a chord though. Physically-speaking atlases look and
feel like books -- but the container is not the important part of the item
is it? Therefore, geographic atlases (not atlases of the body, of
particular animals, etc.) are maps indeed, maps that happen to be collected
and bound into a cover of some sort most of the time (though not always!).
It is the content, in this case a group of sheet maps brought together
along with text and maybe some other illustrations and maybe some charts
too, that one needs to focus on cataloging, and thus it makes perfect sense
that geographic atlases should be cataloged as "maps" and not as "books."
I, for one, was very pleased to see the change in policy when we all went
through format integration back in the late 1990s.

Finally, as you begin full-scale cataloging of your maps keep me in mind as
a resource, and I'm sure other maps catalogers/librarians out there like
Susan Moore, David Bertuca, Mary Larsgaard, and others feel the same. Of
course, keep using MAPS-L as a great resource too!

Sincerely,

Paige

At 01:24 PM 9/29/2005, you wrote:
>================================================
>MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L
>================================================
>
>
>Subject: General Material Descriptor (GMD)
>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005
>From: Miriam Glanz <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>Our University is getting ready to do full-scale cataloging records and
>the cataloging department fired the question below off to me that I
>thought I would pass on to the list for comment. Any comments and or
>insight would be appreciated!
>
>
>
>Why would a library make the decision to NOT use a GMD (general material
>descriptor) for maps?  It seems to me it would be helpful to patrons to
>see "cartographic material" just as they do "electronic resource" or
>"microform" (et al.) when confronted by a long list of titles. Yet the
>GMD is optional, and LC has opted NOT to add it to any cartographic
>material.  I can understand not wanting to use it on atlases (many of
>which I don't think should be cataloged as maps at all), because they're
>very book-like.  Sheet maps, though, seem to be a different animal
>altogether and I think should have the GMD added.
>
>
>
>Miriam Glanz
>
>Arizona State University Library Map Collection
>
>
>
>
>
>--