As the chair of a task force charged with figuring out the best way to use MARC linking fields when cataloging maps that have been removed from identifiable larger resources, I am soliciting input from map librarians beyond the circle of usual suspects (map catalogers who come to the Cataloging and Classification Committee meetings of MAGIRT -- the Map and Geospatial Information Round Table of the American Library Association).  At the recent Midwinter meeting of ALA in Denver, the task force submitted the draft report attached below.  Also attached below is the task force charge.  Each document includes the names of the task force members.

We are now charged with broadening our appeal for input, not only to those who create catalog records for maps, but also to those who use catalog records for maps.

When you are looking at a map that (obviously or not so obviously) has been removed from a book or report or atlas, do you ever wonder what that larger resource is?  Do you want to track down text related to the map or see the context in which it was published?  Or when you are looking through a dealer's catalog and are considering purchase of an expensive old map, if the map wasn't issued separately and the dealer doesn't say what larger resource the map has appeared in, do you hope to find a catalog record that reveals the source of the map, which you might already own in your collection?  How can cataloging records clearly convey this information?  Certain MARC fields and elements were introduced to display how resources are related to each other and to provide links between the related resources.  We want to figure out how to best use these and make an attempt to apply them with some consistency.