Notes
WARNING: These notes make little sense if read sequentially,
or in isolation from the entries on which they are a running
commentary. Return to the entrie to get
the context.
The item itself is the chief source of
information according to 3.0B2, which yields very little information
in this case. This is an example of a map that provides an extreme
paucity of information, and is often a test case of which information
should be provided by the cataloguer when the item itself does
not provide it.
The source of the title and statement of
responsibility must be the chief source (3.0B3), in which
no responsibility is supplied (unless Cornell be taken as the
author, or publisher). It is taken here as the title, arguably
its most likely status. There is no provision for creating
a statement of responsibility if none is included on the item.
For that reason alone, this map receives a title main entry.
One should note, moreover, that the presumably responsible
party (assuming this to be an official publication) is same as
the title anyway. No responsibility indicated, since none is
provided in chief source, and there is no provision for
looking further.
The GMD is chosen from the American list
of options in rule 1.1C1. "Map" doesn't quite fit, since this
is an aerial view, not a map per se, but there is not other
option, and "map" at least conveys the cartographic character
of the work.
No edition statement is given, since none is
provided in the chief source or accompanying material (none).
3.3B7. "Give a statement of scale for...bird's-eye views...only if the
information appears on the item. If the item is not drawn to
scale, give Not drawn to scale." We do not in fact know that this
view is not drawn to scale, so prefer to use LC's phrase
"scale not given," which is more accurate. The attached "statement of projection"
(rule 3.3C1) should be supplied only if given by the item, its container,
or accompanying printed material, and is not relevant to a "view"
in any case, and is so omitted here. The optional "Statement of coordinates" (3.3D)
optional, but should be used if at all possible, given the importance
of this information for uniform retrieval. Nevertheless, the
option is not generally exercised if the information is not easily
available on the item or its accompanying material (Frost 41). I have not
exercised the option here, since it would require some research to
discover the coordinates of Cornell.
1.4C6 encourages the cataloguer to supply a probably place of publication even if none is given on the item.
No such encouragement is given to those who might wish to guess at the publisher.
A date is insisted on by 1.4F7, even a wild guess.
Frost notes (p41) that certain information, such as dates of boundaries
or base map, should not be used as the basis of dating publication according
to CM. It is not clear whether that preclude dating this map from
internal evidence--knowledge of the dates of construction of new
Cornell buildings, for example. Such evidence was at any rate not used
to any great extent in arriving at the guess "198-?". The map was acquired in 1989 and
seemed new then.
"View" is a permissible SMD according to 3.5B1.
Note that this is a black and white map, a fact that is not noted
but is implied by silence on the issue. In a word, if there is
no color, say nothing (3.5C3)
3.5D1 provides some very dense directions on
dimensions. The first thing to remember is that so long as the
map portion of the item is reasonably well bounded (as it is here, by
a "neat line") the dimension to give is always that of the map,
not of the sheet on which it is printed, and always in the order h x w.
The sheet size is sometimes added, on the basis of
the instruction to give the sheet size as well as the map size
if there is substantial additional information, e.g. text, present
in the extra space (still in 3.5D1). Note that though this is a
folded map, one should give the folded size only if the
panel that appears on the outside when the map is folded is
a cover, or bears a title, or is otherwise apparently intended
to appear on the outside. Hence the information is here omitted.
This information is supplied as a "Nature and scope"
note, rule 3.7B1.
This information on the relation of one map
to another in the collection seemed worth recording, though it is
not clear whether it is really an "Edition and history note" (3.7B7)
or perhaps a "Physical description note" (3.7B10).
A Contents note (3.7B18). The notes thus
follow in order of rules, as they should.
For the form of this governmental corporate
name, see rules 24.18A and 24.19A. (The latter, I think, forbids
the form "United States. Army. Map Service," which would otherwise
be reasonable.) Corporate-name main-entry is justified here on
the basis of (1) a clear statement of authorial responsibility
resting in the map service, (2) the knowledge that the Map Service
was a genuine cartographic, not merely publishing, agency (see
Frost, p45), and (3) the existence of rule 21.1B2 paragraph (f),
which essentially accords cartographic materials a privileged
laxity when it comes to the strict requirements otherwise
imposed on corporate-name main entry: "cartographic materials
emanating from a corporate body other than a body that
is merely responsible for their publication or distribution.
Many or most maps fall into this category.
Note that the map of Northeast China on the
verso is ignored here (being relegated to a "with" note at the bottom
of the record). I have taken advantage of the option under
rule 3.1G1, that of making a separate
description for each separately titled part if the cartographic item
lacks a collective title.
Note that though there are
Three dates given on the map, none is an edition statement named as such, so
the edition statement is omitted. 1.2B3-4.
"Projection" is abbreviated as specified by 3.3C1;
the scale statement is supplied by the map itself and thus may remain
without brackets. The additional material on parallels is allowed
but not required by 3.3C2. It might also have been placed in a note,
or omitted altogether.
Coordinates are given as printed on the map. per 3.3D1,
and in keeping with the L of C practice (Frost, 40-1).
Note that of the three dates on the map, only
1944 seems to be a publication date: 1943 is the date that map was
compiled, 1944 apparently its publication date, and 1945, uncertainly,
a revision date.
The rather odd word "Segments," required
by 3.5B2, seems to denote portions of maps that may be assembled
to create a complete one.
Under 3.5B4, an item described separately (because
it lacks a collective title) but which is physically attached
to another such item, as in the present case, must acknowledge the
existence of this other by such strange locutions as "on 1 side of
map" --thereby using "map" to mean "sheet" and "cartographic
representation" in the same (as it were) descriptive sentence. The
locution "on side 1" was chosen here over the alternative "on 1 side"
on the grounds that the maps are sequentially numbered (though "34"
and "35," not "1" and "2") and so the side bearing the map with
the lower number might be construed as the first side. It is not
clear if the rule was meant to be thus applied.
Color is required to be noted by 3.5C3. The
material (Silk) is indicated if it is other than paper. Silk is
in fact one of the AACR2 examples under rule 3.5C4.
"AAF cloth map" is here treated as important
enough to qualify as "Series other info," rule 1.6D1, and is thus
separated by a colon. For the lowercase abbreviated "no." see 1.6G1.
Notes are added as "Nature and scope note"
(3.7B1), "Edition and history note" (3.7B7), "Publication/Distribution
note" (3.7B9), and "With" note (3.7B21) respectively.
This item offers two problems at the outset:
what is the title? and what is the main entry? In the event, I have
given them both the same answer and made this a title entry, but
neither question has an entirely clearcut answer. The problem
with making this a corporate-name main entry is that it is
difficult to know which agency is responsible:
MTA? NYTA? Neither is known as a mapping agency, but then, this
is not the sort of map that a mapping agency would produce.
Use of the title main entry with this particular title in fact
produces both organization names in the title. But is this
the right title. There is an alternative, appearing on the
front panel, and incidentally therefore also within one of the
maps, namely "NY Subway Guide." Both titles are informative
as to area and subject, so the choice comes down to
location. According to the table reproduced by Frost, p. 36,
from CM, the title from within the neat line beats the
panel title by a nose, despite the fulsome nature
of the former in this case.
The copyright attribution to the NY Transit
Authority, though it may reflect some level of responsibiity, is not
really a statement of responsibility. It is taken here
instead as an indicator of publisher.
"Not drawn to scale" should be reserved for
items which really are not drawn to scale, or for which scale
information is wholly inappropriate. As a schematic of subway routes
with little or no connection with geographic reality, this item
probably qualifies as having a "nonlinear scale" or none at all
(3.3B7).
The date of the named revision should be
given as the publication date (1.4F3) and no other.
3.5B2: "If there is more than one map, etc.,
on one or more sheets, specify the number of maps, etc., and the
number of sheets."
Since there are exactly two maps, one must
give the dimensions of both; if there were three or more, "give the
greatest height of any of them followed by the greatest width of any
of them and 'or smaller'" (3.5D1).
The existence of the front panel designed to
be prominent when the map is folded requires that a sheet and folded
sheet size be given (3.5D1).
"Panel title" is one of the examples
specifically given by AACR2 as a possible "variation in title"
note in rule 3.7B4. The other notes are the expected history
note ("first edition...") (3.7B7) and contents note ("On verso...")
(3.7B18).
No question of title choice arises: the front
panel title is the only one available. Similarly, this is a rare case
of a map with personal authorship explicitly stated in the chief source
and described to boot.
3.2C1 and 1.2C and 3.1F require inclusion of
statements of responsibility relating to the edition, but not
to all editions. This seems to qualify, though the extent to which
surveying (information gathering) qualifies as cartographic
responsibility is questionable. It has been considered to qualify
in some rules.(AACR1 211B)
3.3B1 requires that statements or diagrammatic
representations of scale on a map be translated into the the
ISBD(CM) standard form "1:nnnnn." In this case, one conversion is
that of a bar scale (labeled therefore as "ca."), the other stated
as a ratio ("2-1/2 inches to one mile"). The latter is of course
that of the standard British 2-1/2 inch series (1:25000), so no
great calculation was necessary.
Coordinates. In this case I have supplied
coordinates, despite the lack of any mention of them on the map
itself, since they are still readily available, at least
roughly, by recourse to the British National Grid references with
which the map is equipped: these are almost
directly convertible into Latitude and Longitude.
Complete a place name if given by source
in abbreviated form (1.4C4).
I have excluded a certain overlap when
adding together the sizes of the two halves of map (which is divided
onto the two sides of the sheet) to arrive at the overall measurement.
The requirement to arrive at the overall measurement of segments
assembled together is contained in the third paragraph of 3.5D1.
3.7B14 recommends an "intended audience" note
if stated on the item. It is.
Though there is something like an edition
statement on the item, "c1993 edition 5" is obscure, probably
meaning the fifth printing
of 1993 rather than indicating a named edition. Ignore.
Use copyright date in publication statement
per 1.4F.
In the physical description, atlases borrow
some features from book cataloging, e.g. pagination, per rules
3.5B3 and 2.5B, number of maps (rule 3.5C2), and height-only
dimension (rule 3.5D2). I have not included a series statement
here, since the existence of other A-Z Street Atlases probably
does not qualify them as a series worth reporting.
Coordinate data of this specificity actually
supplied on map, hence reproduced in the record, per example in 3.3D1.
Since most maps are published in sets or series,
the most pressing problem facing many map cataloguers is whether in
any given case to catalogue the maps or the series (or both). In this
case, a very popular and wellknown series, most libraries that
had any of them would likely have the whole comprehensive series
and would therefore catalogue it as a series, though each map
stands alone and could be catalogued separately. AACR2r notes the
problem in 3.0J1 but offers no guidance on solving it. CM is said
to do better. I have arbitrarily dealt only with single-item
cataloging here, and treat this example that way.
"MapEasy" seems to be a company in the business
of making maps, justifying corporate-name main entry under 21.1B2(f).
"Scales vary." It is not in fact clear that
the maps on this sheet are drawn to scale at all, in which case
"not drawn to scale" would be more appropriate; or whether
comparing the maps to others would allow one to arrive at a scale
or not (if not, "scale indeterminable" would be appropriate).
Fortunately, there are enough maps and varied enough maps in this
collection to invoke rule 3.3B5 "If the description is of a multipart
item with three or more scales, give 'scales vary.'
3.5D1 again: "If the maps...are of more than
two sizes, give the greatest heigh of any of them followed by
the greatest width of any of them and 'or smaller.'"
I have again adopted the option of giving
a full rather than an abbreviated statement of projection
information, per 3.3C2. AS instructed, parentheses are changed
to commas, "proj." abbreviated and "two" changed to "2."
The coordinates are taken directly from map, but
are not precise.
Note the mixture of dates on material:
c1965 on map, c1966 on book, rpt.
with corrections 1974 on book. Take the first
as from chief source. rpt. date is
not date of named edition and can be ignored except in a note.
The trick to dealing with a map with such abundant auxiliary material
as this one is to remember that the map itself is always the preferred
chief source (sometimes the only allowable source) of information,
the additional material only a secondaray source (3.0B2).
The only substantial change required in
moving from a single-sheet map to a map that like this one is
supplied with abundant documentation, is the need to supply
descriptive details on volumes, pages, and sizes in the manner
used with books (3.5E1 and 1.5E for details).
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.