-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: two confusing LCGFT headings
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 20:46:44 +0000
From: Mark Jackson <[log in to unmask]>
To: Maps, Air Photo, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship
<[log in to unmask]>
Chris,
I'm not a cataloger, but I can tell you plenty about geodatabases and
let you decide what it means to cataloging. A geodatabase is ESRI's
(Environmental Systems Research Institute) name for their brand of
spatial database. A "Geodatabases" is a particular filetype (*.gdb)
which can contain both raster and vector "Geospatial Data". So,
"Geospatial Data" is a much broader term. You mention Shapefiles, which
is ESRI's older file format for individual vector feature layers. You
can import the vector features from a Shapefile into a Geodatabase, but
it is no longer a Shapefile, much the same way you could convert a JPEG
image into a PDF. The content looks the same, but it is not the same
filetype. It is still the same "Geospatial Data". Does that make sense?
So, "Geodatabase" is strictly a form, while "Geospatial Data" is a
genre. Shapefiles are definitely not Geodatabases, but they are
Geospatial Data.
As for your other question, I think that if patrons are going to be able
to find it in your catalog, then it is appropriate for that purpose.
Catalog records are not sufficient for most actual uses of geospatial
data. Check out the Federal Geographic Data Committee's Geospatial
Metadata Standards
(http://www.fgdc.gov/metadata/geospatial-metadata-standards) if you have
questions on that front. For most users a connection to an actual
geospatial database with full metadata accompanying each feature class,
image, or attribute data table would be more desirable than searching a
library catalog, but the catalog is better than nothing.
--
Dr. Mark Jackson
Brigham Young University
Geography, Geology, Civil Engineering, & Technology Librarian
2420 HBLL
Provo UT 84602
801.422.9753
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
On Jun 14, 2012, at 8:51 AM, Angie Cope, American Geographical Society
Library, UW
Milwaukee wrote:
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: two confusing LCGFT headings
> Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 14:31:09 +0000
> From: Christopher Winters <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> To: Maps, Air Photo, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship
> <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>
>
> Can anyone help elucidate the difference between the two LCGFT headings
> "Geodatabases" and "Geospatial data"? It's not at all clear from the
> notes in the authority file. LC practice suggests that the former
> heading (which has appeared only a couple of times) tends to be used for
> shapefiles and the like while the latter (which is commoner) is more
> often used for raster data (mostly georeferenced Sanborn maps). But that
> can't really be true since the LCGFT headings "Raster data" and "Vector
> data" both have 555s referring to "Geospatial data" (but not
> "Geodatabases").
>
> I've asked the folks at LC but haven't yet gotten an answer.
>
> What I'd like to know most of all is what the correct LCGFT heading
> would be for the shapefiles wthe University of Chicago Library has
> acquired from various sources. There are hardly any recent LC records
> for this sort of data set. (A larger issue is whether cataloging records
> are an appropriate form of metadata for geospatial data at all--but,
> hey, they're the kind of metadata that libraries are used to producing
> ...)
>
> Many thanks.
>
> Chris Winters
> Bibliographer for Anthropology, Geography, and Maps
> University of Chicago Library
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Maps, Air Photo, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship
> [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Angie Cope, American Geographical
> Society Library, UW Milwaukee [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 8:20 AM
> To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: NYC Historical GIS project... Years 1 and 2
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: NYC Historical GIS project... Years 1 and 2
> Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 08:52:12 -0400
> From: Matt Knutzen <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> To: Angie Cope, American Geographical Society Library, UW Milwaukee
> <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>
> An update on the NEH funded NYC Historical GIS project...
> http://www.nypl.org/blog/2012/06/13/nyc-historical-gis-project
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matt
|
