===========================================
maps-l     maps-l          maps-l
===========================================
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005
From: Maura O'Connor <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: RE: MAPS-L:  L.C. versus Dewey


Dear Maps-L

At the NLA we use LC G schedule classification for the modern maps (post
1900) and a numerus currens system for our rare material.  When I first
started at the Library many years ago we also provided a Boggs and Lewis
number.  That has not been used for about 18 years because the system is
not regularly updated.

Dewey and to some extent B&L are subject based, while LC G schedule is
geographically based, with a subject component within.  This lends
itself more readily and sensibly to maps. LC is also regulalry updated
which is a bonus. I am aware there are other systems available, eg the
British military also have a scheme, but I am not totally familiar with
them.

Yours sincerely

Maura O'Connor
Map Curator
National Library of Australia
Canberra  ACT  2600
Phone : 61 2 6262 1280
Fax: 61 2 6161 1653
Email : [log in to unmask]


-----Original Message-----
From: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum
 On Behalf Of Angie Cope, AGSL
Sent: Wednesday, 18 May 2005 5:02 AM

Subject: MAPS-L: L.C. versus Dewey

================================================
MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L ** MAPS-L
================================================

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Fwd: L.C. versus Dewey
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 11:49:26 -0700
From: "Mary Douglass" <[log in to unmask]>


Hello
From time to time I have asked a general question on Maps-L about the
value
of cataloging maps so that I could have some feedback for convincing
discussions with management.  With the exception of some isolated
instances, the only catalogued cartographic material at Seattle Public
Library are federal, state and local depository items (and not all of
them).

However, I am glad to report that we now have the opportunity to catalog
our local history map collection, and the librarian who has been
cataloging
our local documents will take on the cataloging task.  These items have
previously been classed with a hybrid map classification scheme that was
developed years ago by the former map librarians here at Seattle Public.
Of course, all of our main library material is classed using Dewey, so
the
task before us now is to decide whether to use Dewey or LC to class our
historical map collection.

And I know what system a number of Mapsters would recommend, but I am
interested in your opinions. I would like to collect a handful of cogent
statements that summarize the value of using LC or Dewey (or some other
system), and I thank you for your responses in advance.

In addition, I would love to know if there is a map cataloger or map
librarian out there who would be willing to chat with the administrator
of
our Seattle Collection.   In addition to written feedback, I think that
she
would simply like to have a conversation with someone who can help her
think through the issues we are faced with.  Any volunteers?

Mary Douglass
History, Travel and Maps Department
Seattle Public Library
[log in to unmask]



----- End forwarded message -----