Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | Maps, Air Photo, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship |
Date: | Mon, 27 Feb 2012 10:31:50 -0600 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: New cartographic genre/form terms
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:23:07 -0500
From: Fry, Michael <[log in to unmask]>
To: Maps, Air Photo, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship
<[log in to unmask]>
Hello,
I'm not a cataloger, but I'm curious about Paige's comment last week
that "not everyone agrees [that form/genre headings are] useful or
needed". We plan to start implementing f/g soon, going forward and
retrospectively, so I'm interested in what the controversy (maybe too
strong a word?) is. Questions for the crowd:
* If you aren't planning to implement f/g, why?
* If you are, are you doing so fully or selectively? For new records,
or retrospectively, too?
* Finally, are you using the generic "Maps" heading so that each
record has at least one genre heading?
Thanks.
mf
--
Michael Fry
Senior Map Librarian
National Geographic Society
1145 17th St. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
202.857.7098 <tel:202.857.7098>
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
|
|
|