======================================================================= MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ======================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 From: "Maura O'Connor" <[log in to unmask]> Subject: Records to Pieces Ratio Jenny It largely depends on how you are cataloguing your collection. At the NLA we aim to catalogue all the sheets in series, providing individual records for those in the Australian series. Some series do not lend themselves to this type of treatment however, so a collection level record only will appear. For our overseas series we only do collection level records. I would estimate about two-thirds of our collection are maps in series, so I will leave you and/or others to work out the proportions on that one! Yours sincerely Maura O'Connor Map Curator National Library of Australia Canberra ACT 2600 Phone : 61 2 6262 1280 Fax: 61 2 6161 1653 Email : [log in to unmask] -----Original Message----- From: Maps and Air Photo Systems Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Angie Cope, American Geographical Society Library UWM Sent: Saturday, 9 April 2005 3:13 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: MAPS-L: RE: Records to Pieces Ratio ======================================================================= MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ======================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 From: Paige Andrew <[log in to unmask]> Subject: Records to Pieces Ratio Jenny, As you know, I've been working in two major map collections over nearly 20 years, so I do have a "feel" in regards to your question, assuming that both large map collections (Univ. of Georgia and Penn State) are "typical" in scope and content. Please don't hold me to these numbers as being anything near accurate and/or scientific, but I think its about a 3 to 1 ratio of individual sheets/pieces to bibliographic records. I'm interested in seeing other comments towards your question too. Paige p.s. Looking forward to seeing you in DC in May! At 11:15 AM 4/8/2005, you wrote: > ======================================================================== > > MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L > > ======================================================================== > > Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 > From: Jenny Marie Johnson <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Records to Pieces Ratio > > Hi. > > This probably is one of those questions that can't be answered -- > although for some reason I vaguely remember reading or hearing a > discussion about it. > > Is there any kind of ratio that can be expected for the number of > bibliographic records to the number of pieces in a "typical," fully > cataloged map collection? Is there any way of saying "Since we have > x,000 pieces we can expect to find y,000 map records in the online > catalog?" > > I'm not expecting there to be a truly scientific ratio! Commonsense, > wisdom from the ages, or folklore/urban myth -- all ideas will be > helpful! > > Thanks! > > Jenny Marie Johnson > Map and Geography Librarian and > Assoc. Professor of Library Administration > > University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign --