J. McRee Elrod responded to a quoted snippet: >Content: cartographic image >Content: text >Media needed to access content: unmediated >Carrier: volume >Extent: 1 atlas (68 pages)
Or it could be "Content: cartographic image, text" But why not "map, text"? RDA media terms often seem to use phrases where a word would do. ------------------------------------ "Map" is problematic because it means more than one thing. In common English, we use "map" to represent both the nature of the content and the carrier of the content: saying something is a map means the graphical representation of cartographic data and the thing on which such a representation is presented. In many cases they are coterminous and, being human, we can get away with the "sloppiness" of our usage. But we also see cases where they aren't -- 1 map on 4 sheets; 4 maps on 1 sheet. The data structures that Karen Coyle is exploring and advocating for, in order to support computer/machine processing of information, cannot and will not work with this kind of ambiguity. There absolutely has to be a one-to-one correspondence between terminology and meaning. This unfortunately means some awkward and convoluted terminology in order to differentiate the various uses as well as to incorporate the terminology into the framework of other terms. It can be hoped, as we move forward, that interfaces will be developed both for input and display of data which will afford more amenable terminology for the human user. For the time being, and during this period of transition in particular, the strangeness of the RDA terms serves to enforce the care with which we must conceptualize content/medium/carrier/extent and thereby properly apply the terms appropriate to each category. John F. Myers, Catalog Librarian Schaffer Library, Union College 807 Union St. Schenectady NY 12308 518-388-6623 mye...@union.edu
