----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Maps People In our preparations for loading Marcive, we are dealing with a lot of minute details. One of these details deals with maps. Right now, we have all kinds of locations for various groups of maps. Topographic, nauticals, national forest maps, and other major series maps are filed together with the items in the series. We also have a set of "Miscellaneous" GPO maps under SuDocs Classification--sort of a split subset of maps we received that we don't have any rules for (as I said--miscellaneous). I would prefer to classify these items, add an 099 field to the marcive record and put all of the miscellaneous maps together in a single area. However, our head of cataloging does not agree. My reasoning is: 1. Makes the collection easier to organize. 2. Makes the collection easier for patrons to use, because they won't have to look several places for maps on a single topic. 3. Since most of the other maps in our collection are classified and indexed on DBASE (a local solution because the maps are not cataloged), having a few full records in the database would lead patrons to the other maps on the same topic (which would incidentally be filed with the maps with the edited Marcive Records). Can anyone comment on these plans, and give me some additional, practical reasons for or against these plans? Does anyone just file by SuDocs and ignore LC? Sorry to say this, but I need your reasons by tommorrow (Wednesday, May 4, 1994) at 3:00 PM. You can either reply to the list or to me. I am sure that a discussion of this topic on the list would be of interest to others. Linda Zellmer [log in to unmask]