Date:         Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:09:16 -0400
Reply-To:     Subject Coordinates Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Subject Coordinates Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
From:         "Rebecca S. Guenther" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: The proposal passed MARBI!
Comments: To: Subject Coordinates Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

I agree with Andy that it doesn't much matter because it's easy to convert
(which is why we're not specifying which form it's in). If we need to
standardize on one, I would vote for decimal degrees, since we expect to
be using the data in GIS systems (or so I suspect).

Rebecca
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^  Rebecca S. Guenther                                   ^^
^^  Senior Networking and Standards Specialist            ^^
^^  Network Development and MARC Standards Office         ^^
^^  1st and Independence Ave. SE                          ^^
^^  Library of Congress                                   ^^
^^  Washington, DC 20540-4402                             ^^
^^  (202) 707-5092 (voice)    (202) 707-0115 (FAX)        ^^
^^  [log in to unmask]                                          ^^
^^                                                        ^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


On Fri, 30 Jun 2006, Houghton,Andrew wrote:

> > From: Subject Coordinates Discussion List 
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Colleen R. Cahill
> > Sent: 30 June, 2006 07:15
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: [SUBCOOR] The proposal passed MARBI!
> > 
> > We now face some choices, primarly in what format we want the 
> > coordinates to appear in authority records.  This can be 
> > either degrees, minutes, seconds or decimal degrees: both 
> > have advantages and disadvantages. Here are a few I have 
> > thought of and am hoping for your input:
> > 
> > Degrees, minutes, seconds format
> > Pro:
> > -Format most often printed on maps
> > -Familiar to most people
> > -Easy to quality review
> > -Format most often used in bib records
> > 
> > Con:
> > -Not format used by GIS search engines
> > 
> > Decimal Degrees
> > Pro:
> > -Format used by GIS search engines
> > -Can harvest data from GIS tools 
> > 
> > Con:
> > -Not as easy to quality review
> > -Not as familiar a format to the average person
> 
> Handheld GPS devices can output either format and output from 
> the GPS device may be used to create local authority records.  
> In addition, the conversion between decimal degrees and DMS 
> is trivial.  If the catalog uses decimal degrees, it can be 
> easily converted to DMS for user friendly displays.  This 
> point negates Con(2) under Decimal Degrees.
> 
> I'm not throwing my two cents either way, just providing a
> few additional thoughts.  So long as the data is in its own
> subfield and it doesn't need to be parsed out of other textual
> data, then either format can be used effectively.
> 
> 
> Andy.
>