================================================ MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ================================================ Subject: RE: MAPS-L: TOWN division visual guide Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 From: Curtis, Gwen <[log in to unmask]> To: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum <[log in to unmask]> The state maps in the older editions of the Rand McNally Commercial Atlas and Marketing Guide show the county and town boundaries. -- Gwen Curtis -----Original Message----- From: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Angie Cope, AGSL Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 2:32 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: MAPS-L: TOWN division visual guide ================================================ MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ================================================ Subject: MAPS-L: geographic s.h. questionn TOWN s.h. Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 From: Nat Case <[log in to unmask]> To: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum <[log in to unmask]> This variation in sub-county administration is something I've been oddly fascinated by for a while. Has anyone seen (or made) a visual guide to these subdivisions? I think it might be an interesting map, perhaps shading all the different named divisions... Nat >By the way ... the question has been sufficiently answered. Additional >comments are welcome - but the main issue has been addressed. Thanks all. >================================================ >MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L >================================================ > >Subject: Re: MAPS-L: geographic s.h. question >Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 >From: David J. Bertuca <[log in to unmask]> >To: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum ><[log in to unmask]> > > >Hello Beth and all; > >Here at University at Buffalo, that was a continuing topic among the >catalogers. I have been planning on adding a short clarification note >on our website for map cataloging and just haven't gotten to it. The LC >Map Cataloging Manual has a definition and without having it in hand, I >can give you a basic description. For some states, there are distinct >towns and larger municipalities that are either called "townships" or just "towns" >that have the same name as the town (smaller unit) within their boundaries. > >In NY and PA (which we've cataloged a lot of), there are many instances >of this. An example below illustrates: > >3804 B32 Bath (N.Y.) >3804 B323 Bath (N.Y. : Town) > >There is a town called Bath, and within its limits there is "the" town >of Bath (it could have been the "village" or other official name). Bath >(N.Y.) is the urban area called "Town of Bath" but it is situated >within a township called "Bath" which gets the heading Bath (N.Y. : Town). > >The urban center is the first heading above, while the township is the >2nd version, with the qualifier "town." > >In NY the word "Township" is not used so the headings do not use it. >There are some states (LC lists these in the Manual) that do use >"Township" as their qualifier. > >This of course is the really short version of this. You can almost >always follow this and be correct as generally, the "Town" qualifier >represents the larger entity, not the smaller. > >IF the township does not have a town within its boundaries that uses >the same name, then you can just use the "[townname] (N.Y.)" without >further qualifier. that of course makes it a little more exciting to >work on and a gazetteer and atlas is very helpful. Also, LC has placed >its G schedule online and has included all the town/township/village, >etc. entries for U.S. towns and cities. that is very helpful too. > >the big thing is to be consistent when doing this, so that if later you >realize that you did them the opposite way from earlier works or >in-house policy decisions, you can at least know you did them all the same. > >I know for example, that some of our catalogers were interpreting it >that the larger township was the unqualified heading while the smaller >urban center was given the "Town" qualifier. and an argument can be >made for both ways. The above is based on LC's interpretation and how they follow it. > >clear as mud, I know. I hope it was descriptive enough. > >David J. Bertuca, Map Librarian >University at Buffalo > >--On Thursday, October 20, 2005 12:49 PM -0500 "Angie Cope, AGSL" ><[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >>================================================ >>MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L >>================================================ >>Subject: geographic s.h. question >>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 >>From: Beth Cox <[log in to unmask]> >>Reply-To: OnLine Audiovisual Catalogers list >><[log in to unmask]> >>To: [log in to unmask] >> >>Hi, all. I'm hoping someone out there can answer a question from a >>newbie map cataloger. Today I was cataloging a map of a portion of >>New Hampshire. As per our local practice, I was adding individual >>subject headings for each town that had a separate street map on the >>verso of the main map. While searching the authority file in OCLC, I >>found that a number of these towns had two headings: for example, >>"Meredith (N.H.)" and "Meredith (N.H. : Town)". I have not noticed >>this with towns in other states. And as far as I can tell, both >>headings are listed as valid in the authority file. Which is correct? >>And if one is correct and one isn't, why are both listed? >> >>Thanks so much, in advance, for your help! >> >>Beth >> >> >>Elizabeth J. Cox >>Special Formats Librarian >>Morris Library, Mailcode 6632 >>Southern Illinois University Carbondale >>605 Agriculture Drive >>Carbondale, IL 62901 >> >>Phone: 618-453-5594 >>Fax: 618-453-3452 >>E-mail: [log in to unmask] >> >>"The cats I like best are the cats who take chances" -- Thelonious >>Monk >> >>-- >> > > > >David J. Bertuca >[log in to unmask] > > >-- -- Nat Case Hedberg Maps, Inc -- --