We're scoping out a project to re-catalog* hundreds of atlases so that they appear to users in search results as (Material Type=) "Map" instead of "Book". Our new discovery layer (ExL's Primo VE) gives users more control over their search results than our old OPAC, and I don't want "savvier" users to refine out of their own results (or skim past) resources that may contain useful maps merely because some, usually older atlases were originally cataloged as books/monographs*.

I've seen a variety of tips on how to make this ("book" or "map"?) decision; all are variations on a theme: Do the maps support/illustrate the text, or does the text support/describe the maps? Or more crudely: Does the item contain > or < 50% maps?

These are instructive but open to interpretation (and rightly so), so I'm struggling to come up with a consistent approach to re-typing many, many titles. On one hand, it's obvious to me that our Road Atlas of Malaysia is a "map," as is the National Atlas of Kenya; the maps are the point. 

OTOH, I think that any of the coffee-table-ish historical atlases done by Derek Hayes--all but one (!) of which appear to our users as "map"--might be better cataloged as "book" because the maps are so reduced that they've lost most or all of their cartographic utility; they are merely illustrations.

Curious if and how any of you have approached this. Or would.

Thanks very much.
Michael

==================
* Please pardon my imprecise use of terms throughout. 

--
Michael Fry
Collections Manager | Map Library Manager
National Geographic Society Library
202.807.3139

Nat Geo Logo Yellow_Black.png

1145 17th St., NW, Washington, DC 20036