repetitive navigational links
L-Soft  -  Home of  the  LISTSERV  mailing list  manager LISTSERV(R) 14.5
Skip repetitive navigational links
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (September 2005)Back to main SUBCOOR pageJoin or leave SUBCOORReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional fontLog in
Date:         Wed, 31 Aug 2005 13:35:16 -0700
Reply-To:     [log in to unmask]
Sender:       Subject Coordinates Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Mary Larsgaard <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: UCSB Map & Imagery Lab, Library
Subject:      Re: coordinates entry in catalog records
Comments: To: Subject Coordinates Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed

Dean, I'm so glad to hear I'm not the only one routinely inputting coordinates on every record (when it's planet Earth - MARC21 isn't set up to specify what planetary body the coords are for; Earth is assumed but unfortunately not specified). just a few comments at ** Dean C Rogers wrote: >I like what Jimmie says below. I put coordinates into map records every >working day. The new Google Earth product is the best aid I have >discovered so far, to show extent of coverage when the 4 areal extremes >are vague or nonexistent. It even shows my car parked in front of my >house, if I zoom in! > >There are several coordinate problems with the records we are creating >these days: >1. We need to extend mandatory geographic data in bib records to non-map >items because many non-map non-fiction resources have place orientation >that could be invaluable to a patron searching electronically; > > **yes indeedy. I remember a couple years back, a friend of mine who was cataloging photographs of portions of a city was going to enter coordinates into each record, unwisely mentioned that to someone at one of the utilities, who told her no-no, can't enter coordinates for non-cart.mtls. one experiment we'd like to do here at UCSB is download all of the non-cartmtl records in the library's online catalog, pull out all the ones that have geographic-area subject headings (which MARC21 makes very do-able), and then add coordinates to each record (that's the tricky part), and load records into Alexandria Digital Library catalog. >2. More and more resources are neither map nor non-map! They are >"georeferenced" (often electronic) documents that may contain a simplified >map for general orientation, but also contain, as a main feature, a >multilayered GIS database with extensive metadata to explain that >database, text, previous editions, author biographies, related hot keys, >music, illustrations, and just about any other thing an author might dream >up to put in. > > **right. >3. We do not value that proper coordinates are clean, hard data that yield >very good hits: You are either within a boundary or not, and this lends >itself to very effective binary manipulation. > > **the problem being that if the given area is not a rectangle (or more correctly a trapezoid, given how lines of longitude operate), then one has to input vertices of a non-bounding-box polygon, and that really is time-consuming. also, it's tough to get software that can search non-bounding-box polygons. >4. Once you have seen Google Earth, you will realize that patrons will >soon expect to be able to draw a border on a region and ask for anything >on any topic within that area. We MUST have the clean, hard coordinates >in the catalog records to support this functionality. >5. Saay, shouldn't catalogers have this kind of point-and-click automation >for the input of record coordinates? As it is now, many non-map catalogers >run from coordinates as geekcraft. If we had a smart and easy aid (like >Google Earth) built in, as part of our cataloging software, it would make >geospatializing records much easier. > > **yes!! the whole task would be so much less time-consuming and more accurate. >6. I spend waay too much time duplicating projection (in Fixed Field and >255 field) and coordinates (in 034 and 255 fields) into bib records. If a >cataloger enters the projection, degrees, minutes, and seconds once in a >record, why can't the automated cataloging program transfer them wherever >else they may be needed? > > **LCG&M has software where the coordinates are entered by a human being only once and then the software enters them the 2d time. if i remember correctly, the software is available on the MARC21 website. >7. I should, but do not know, the origin of degrees, minutes, and seconds. > From the time of Portugese Prince Henry, the Navigator? Or perhaps >earlier, from the Medieval period. The wierd non-decimal scheme of >degrees, minutes, and seconds was devised in an era when so much >mathematical work was done in the head (navigating on a stormy sea) with >shortcuts we have, for the most part, lost today. To me, decimalizing a >degree or minute is a perversion of this ancient system. (I should tell >this to the scientists at my agency). If a finer increment than a second >is needed, I have no problem with dividing a second by 10. Computers >today can convert quickly back and forth between the decimal and degree >(or any other) system. It is at the human level where confusion arises. >8. The next geospatial horizon is mainstreaming our excellent Global >Positioning System, which also indicates elevation. I would like to see >online cataloging interface easily with the Global Positioning System. > >Our patrons deserve the best. > > > **which is why they get us as catalogers:-) Mary Mary Lynette Larsgaard Assistant Head, Map and Imagery Laboratory Fund Manager: Geography Co-Manager for Map and Imagery Laboratory Fund Davidson Library University of California Santa Barbara CA 93106-9010 USA 805/893-4049 fax 805/893-8799 [log in to unmask] >Thank you. > >Dean Rogers >Map Cataloger >U.S. Geological Survey Library >Reston, Va. 20192 > > > > > >Jimmie Lundgren <[log in to unmask]> >Sent by: Subject Coordinates Discussion List <[log in to unmask]> >08/17/2005 02:57 PM >Please respond to >Subject Coordinates Discussion List <[log in to unmask]> > > >To >[log in to unmask] >cc > >Subject >Re: Question on form of coordinates > > > > > > >Colleen is probably composing a more complete response, but here is a >short >version of what I understand we are hoping to accomplish. > >1. Determine a way of expressing coordinates that will work well both in >terms of interoperability with geospatial databases and usability by >catalog >librarians. > >2. Propose a new field in MARC bibliographic records (standard coding >system >for catalog records) for all formats of materials (not just cartographic) >to >allow subject searching via geographic coordinates. This is very different >from the currently-used 034 and 255 fields which are only used for >cartographic materials and record the coverage of the particular >cartographic item being described. > >3. Develop a standard list/database of geographic coordinates associated >with places, hopefully through compilation from other reliable sources. >This >will enable catalogers to copy and paste correct coordinates from the list >into the new field on the bibliographic record. > >4. Propose a new field in MARC authority records for places for inclusion >of >the geographic coordinates formatted for searching and interoperability >also. (I have drafted a discussion paper on this topic during the past >year >with some of my colleagues here and with input from MAGERT, and hope to >expand, strengthen and submit sometime soon. One of my difficulties in >developing this discussion paper has been choosing the best way of >expressing coordinates that will be both searchable and easy for >librarians >to record, so I am eagerly reading messages from each of you that help to >shed light on this aspect. Please send more.) > >I am very excited about this because I believe it will ultimately lead to >greatly improved access to all kinds of information about places for >researchers. I am so grateful to Colleen for initiating this project, and >to >each of you for your contributions! > >Thanks, > >Jimmie Lundgren >Cataloging & Metadata Dept. >George A. Smathers Libraries >University of Florida >Gainesville, FL 32611 >352-392-0351 > >

Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SUBCOOR page

LISTSERV.LOC.GOV CataList email list search Powered by LISTSERV email list manager