-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Question about the new form/genre 655 headings
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:12:46 -0400
From: Paige Andrew <[log in to unmask]>
To: Maps, Air Photo, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship <[log in to unmask]>


Chris,

The new cartographic form/genre headings went into effect on September 1st. If you do searches in the authority files for things such as "topographic maps" you will find that these are now tagged as 155s, and therefore are to be used as 655 headings in bib. records. More importantly, while in OCLC if you try and use the "old" form of these headings -- at the end of 650 or 651 strings, they will not validate. That's a big "clue" as to the need to place these types of headings now into the 655 field.

In case folks missed any/some of this, there are several documents related to this change on the Library of Congress' Cataloging and Acquistions homepage, http://www.loc.gov/aba/ and click on the first item under "News", and then you can find several other documents by clicking on Genre/Form Headings at the Library of Congress under the "Subject & Genre/Form Headings" area.

Basically, one leaves the $v Maps at the end of a 6XX string, but for any of most of the other common f/g terms these get placed in separate 655 fields. So, you get:

651 0 State College (Pa.) $v Maps.
655 0 Tourist maps.

Note that "Tourist maps" is the uninverted form of the old "Maps, Tourist" that used to go at the end of the 6XX string.

To see a list of "official" cartographic f/g headings if you have access to Classification Web go to the LC Subject Headings link on the main menu and type in "cartographic materials" at the Structured Subject Heading box and click on "browse". You'll get a short list of three broad headings, one of which is "cartographic materials", click on that to get the narrower terms. In addition, Joel Hahn kindly compiled and shared a list of these as part of a much larger f/g document that can be found at: http://www.hahnlibrary.net/libraries/formgenre-categorized.html#maps

If you're interested in seeing a document about this change that we at Penn State on our Maps Cataloging Team completed today I can share a draft of it with you if you contact me offline.

Paige

On 9/23/2010 3:43 PM, Angie Cope wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite"> -------- Original Message --------
Subject: Question about the new form/genre 655 headings
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:32:47 -0500
From: Chris Winters <[log in to unmask]>
To: Maps, Air Photo, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship <[log in to unmask]>


I'm a little confused about correct practice for the new 655s.
 
I'd be grateful for anyone's thoughts on the following:
 
[1] It looks as though LC is insisting on including a
 
655  0 Maps.
 
(see, e.g., OCLC 664808196) in the absence of a "thematic" 655. The implication is that from now on all map records _must_ have a 655. Is this right? (But see OCLC 664808195 for a counterexample.)
 
[2] "Road maps" does not appear in the list of 655s I've seen, but see OCLC  664808197 which has both
 
655  0 Road maps.
 
and a
 
650  0 Roads #z[Place name] #vMaps.
 
Is this right? (Note also OCLC 664808194, which has a
 
655  0 Roads maps.
 
.) Other recent LC records (e.g., 664808196, mentioned above) don't try to get "road maps" into a 655 at all.
 
Is there a "correct" practice here?
 
Thanks.
 
Chris Winters
University of Chicago Library