In addition to Linda's suggestion about both titles in the 245, definitely put the $$b title in a 246.





Here are a few examples that may help:





oclc no. 1024317529

oclc no. 961322867



Use a 300 description - 2 maps on 1 sheet : both sides, color ; etc.



I select the first title based on what one sees first on the folded map as it comes out of the magazine. Then add the second title in a 245 $$b but most certainly in a 246.



The 500 notes and subject headings reflect content of both maps.



Have fun!



Angie









________________________________

From: Maps-L: Map Librarians, etc. <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Zellmer, Linda <[log in to unmask]>

Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 7:03 AM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: [MAPS-L] cataloging 2-sided maps



While I am not a really experienced cataloger, there is an option for other titles to be added in the 245 field. The OCLC Bibliographic Formats and standards for the 245 field says "If the item lacks a collective title, input the first title in subfield ǂa. Input subsequent titles in field 245 subfield ǂb, as appropriate." You might want to add the second title in the 245 $b field. Alternatively, you could add the second title in the 246 field (varying form of title).



Linda Zellmer

--

Linda Zellmer

Government Information & Data Services Librarian

Liaison to Natural & Physical Sciences & Agriculture

415 Malpass Library

Macomb, IL 61455

[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

Phone: 309-298-2723<callto:309-298-2723>

Fax: 309-298-2791<callto:309-298-2791>





On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 8:33 PM Fry, Michael <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

Question(s) for you map catalogers out there.



We're doing a retrospective cat project to get all of our old "classic" Nat Geo maps cataloged and accessible via OPAC, etc. Many of these maps are actually "2 maps on one sheet"--e.g., a physical or thematic of some place on one side, and a political or reference map of the same place on the other.



In these cases, it's often the case that neither map is more important cartographically than the other. So to the extent that MARC necessarily (?) forces catalogers to emphasize the "main" map over all others (insets, etc.), I want to direct our cataloger to minimize the inequality of cataloging and description. To the greatest extent possible, I want/need both maps fully described and findable; I don't want one side relegated to a few words in a 500 field, for example.



Any tips on how to best accomplish this? I see records in Worldcat for some of these maps that put both titles in the 245 field, list 6xx fields that appear to cover both sides, etc. Are these legit approaches? Are there others you'd recommend?



Thanks very much for your input.



Michael



--

Michael Fry

Collections Manager | Map Library Manager

National Geographic Society Library

202.807.3139

[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>







[Nat Geo Logo Yellow_Black.png]<http://www.nationalgeographic.org>



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



[Email-Signature8.gif]<https://donate.nationalgeographic.org/em-sig>