Coded data for cartographic bibliographic descriptions
Many a time in my former life as a map librarian, patrons, instead of requesting a specific cartographic document, would usually posed questions like: "Do you have a map covering that area with that subject/theme on that scale and/or around that time?" And some were even more specific and requested that the data on the cartographic material were depicted using a certain technology or created from certain sources, especially with remote sensing maps. They viewed our collection more as a collection of information than as a collection of objects.
After an interview of between 10 and 30 minutes we were pretty sure what the patron wanted and could proceed or not to produce the document(s) needed.
When the DUMC (Dutch Union Map Catalogue)-project was started in the early 1970s under the guidance of professor Cornelis Koeman (who was first a geodetic engineer and later became the first professor in cartography in The Netherlands) there was the idea of how a bibliographic apparatus might be able to answer such questions. The idea was that one should not only describe the cartographic materials at hand bibliographically but also encode (i.e., use codes for) as much possible data regarding the content of the document on fixed positions in certain fields. When all these coded data were indexed it should be possible to build a user interface that, when queried, could come up with answers that approximated the patron's request.
When I started to work with the DUMC in 1979 the possibility to add coded data was realized in Unimarc, the system then in use. Thus happily we added as much as possible codes to our descriptions. Till 1984 they included even geographical coordinates that were converted from the verbal coordinate-field (255$c) to positive coordinates (decimal degree format) in the 034 field as computers only could do arithmetics with positive values. Unfortunately this feature disappeared when in 1983 we had to convert our database to the format used by Pica, the foundation that develops and administers the bibliographic database we use. Pica for some years now is incorporated into OCLC.
Unfortunately the creation of a user interface that could handle all these encoded data points was never realized. This was amongst other things the result of another conversion to a new DUMC-system in 1989 and a new conversion to Pica in 2009. The DUMC died a silent death in 1999 as the participants did not believe that a separate bibliographic system for cartographic materials could survive in a media world that was striving for one-stop-shop systems for all library materials.
However, up till now I have been adding coded data to all cartographic descriptions, now numbering some 30,000 items. Even my colleagues at the university libraries are starting to do so more and more, though not as fanatical as I would like.
MARC21
Though not very far away from my retirement I'm suddenly, like all my colleagues, confronted with the possible conversion of all bibliographic data from our present Pica-MARC to MARC21. To make the conversion as smooth as possible I have been requested by OCLC|Pica to evaluate whether coded and verbal data concerning cartographic materials will be given their right place in the MARC21 fields. After struggling to understand where certain coded data belonged I was left with some unresolved matters. After e-mail correspondence with Paige Andrew (whom I also thank for editing this document) I was able to recognize more possible fields in which to place coded data. However, not all data we encode can be put in the MARC21-format. Although much concerning the content or character of a map can be noted in the 500-fields, a lot of information is not described using codes.
Looking through the 006/008 fixed-fields we see that there is the possibility for other cataloguers to fill in coded data, such as for 'all materials', 'books', computer files', 'music', continuing resources', 'visual materials' and 'mixed materials', and in 007 several more.
While corresponding with Paige I have come up with the question: "Are the coded data being used one way or another by library-patrons or are we just filling up space? And if yes, do we enter enough coded data in our descriptions?"
I would like to discuss this with colleagues world-wide. Of course the first question is of most importance (i.e., are patrons able to use our retrieval systems based on coded data), before we can discuss the next one (i.e., are map catalogers including enough coded data to make different forms of retrieval possible/effective). But to help participants with context I'll list next where encoded information can be found in MARC21 and what data, in my opinion, is lacking.
(when discussing fixed field codes we of course have to keep in mind that the cartographic/geo-field is constantly creating new expressions, that makes the fields similar to ongoing resources)
006 - Fixed-Length Data Elements-Additional Material Characteristics (R): Maps
007 - Physical Description Fixed Field-General Information (R): Map (007/00=a)<https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd007a.html>, Globe (007/00=d)<https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd007d.html>
008 - Fixed-Length Data Elements-General Information (NR): Maps
034 - Coded Cartographic Mathematical Data (R)
045 - Time Period of Content (NR)
In 1997 coded data concerning prime meridians became obsolete in MARC21. These are important for most pre-1884 maps and maps, e.g., from France and Spain, that use the Paris or Madrid meridian.
Up till that time probably the same codes were used as by us:
aa
Greenwich
International prime meridian
ab
Amsterdam
E 4 53 01
ac
Athene
E 23 42 59
ad
Batavia
E 106 48 28
ae
Bern
E 7 26 22
af
Bogota
W 74 04 53
ag
Bombay
E 72 48 55
ah
Brussel
E 4 22 06
ai
Cadiz
W 6 17 42
aj
Kaapstad
E 18 48 41
ak
Caracas
W 66 55 50
al
Kopenhagen
E 12 34 40
am
Cordoba
W 64 12 03
an
Ferro
W 17 39 46
aE
Helsinki
E 24 57 17
ap
Istanbul
E 28 58 50
aq
Julianehaab
W 46 02 22
ar
Lissabon
W 9 11 10
as
Londen
E 0 05 43
at
Madras
E 80 14 50
ba
Madrid
W 3 41 15
bb
Mexico city
W 99 11 40
bc
Moskou
E 37 34 15
bd
München
E 11 36 32
be
Napels
E 14 15 42
bf
Oslo
E 10 43 23
bg
Parijs
E 2 20 14
bh
Peking
E 116 28 10
bi
Philadelphia
W 75 08 55
bj
Pulkovo (Leningrad)
E 30 19 39
bk
Rio de Janeiro
W 43 01 21
bl
Rome
E 12 29 05
bm
Santiago (Chili)
W 70 41 00
bn
Stockholm
E 18 03 30
bE
Sydney
E 151 12 23
bp
Tirana
E 19 46 45
bq
Tokyo
E 139 44 40
br
Washington, DC
W 77 00 34
bs
New York City
W 74 00 29
xx
other
yy
no prime meridian
zz
unknown
Cartographic imaging technology definitions/descriptions from cataloging/other reference sources. (terms derived from: KW = Dutch cartographic dictionary, CM = Cartographic Materials: A Manual of Interpretation for AACR2, Second Edition, BDI = Dutch library dictionary)
Anaglyps (KW, CM)
Polarized map (KW)
Planimetric map (KW)
Diagram map (KW, CM)
Flow map (KW)
Dot map (KW)
Diagrammatic map (KW)
Choropleth map (KW)
Dot map (KW)
Dasymetric map (KW)
Grid map (KW)
Isoline map / Isopleth map (KW)
Anamorphic map (BDI, CM)
Stereoscopic model / statistical block digram (KW)
Mental map (KW)
Elevational drawing with horizon (incl. bird's eye view and pictorial relief map) (KW)
Elevational drawing without horizon (incl. bird's eye view and pictorial relief map) (KW)
Mapview (in combination with map in orthographic projection and details which are depicted in elevation)
Pictomap (KW)
Random dot map
Grid map (KW)
Map without grid
Form of the cartographic document, like:
Atlas (KW)
Atlas-map
Map (KW)
Wall map (KW)
Chart (KW)
Town map (KW)
Cadastral plan (KW)
Architectural drawing or plan
Picture postcard (BDI)
Map on calender
Map as puzzle
Map as kit
Index / Sheet index (KW)
(sketch map, -, route map,
Topographic elevational drawing (KW)
Gore map (KW)
Lineprinter map (KW)
Block diagram (KW)
Profile (KW)
Architectural rendering (CM)
Globe (KW)
Braille [map] (BDI)
Facsimile map (KW)
Uncontrolled photomap (CM)
Controlled photomap (CM)
Photomosaic (KW)
Photomap (BDI)
Orthophotomap (CM)
Again, my aim for posting this on MAPS-L is to start a conversation amongst catalogers in particular, but more broadly amongst anyone with an interest in seeing changes to our cartographic resources cataloging based on possibly using codes more frequently for describing data points in tandem with textual data. If there is a relevant need for adding to or changing the MARC21 descriptive cataloging standard to enhance the user experience in terms of retrieving needed maps (or similar) through assisting computers by the use of more codes then how do we move forward to accomplish this?
With kind regards,
Jan Smits
Senior cataloger/Senior information specialist
Koninklijke Bibliotheek, National Library of The Netherlands
[Koninklijke Bibliotheek, National Library of the Netherlands]
Prins Willem-Alexanderhof 5 | 2595 BE Den Haag
Postbus 90407 | 2509 LK Den Haag | (070) 314 09 11 | www.kb.nl<http://www.kb.nl/>
[http://www.kb.nl/sites/default/files/dots.jpg]
English version<http://www.kb.nl/en/email> | Disclaimer<http://www.kb.nl/disclaimer>