[DCRM-L] Cataloging of single leaves
Ann Myers
amyers at lib.siu.edu
Tue Apr 6 12:06:43 MDT 2010
We have just started investigating the same issue here. Most of our
single leaves are manuscripts with the added challenge of not being able
to identify the work from which they originated, so cataloging those as
single leaves makes the most sense. However, we have also cataloged a
few Caxton leaves as single leaves - we were uncomfortable with giving
the impression that we have the whole book when all we have is a leaf,
especially knowing how few patrons read the local notes in our records.
For examples, see OCLC # 317410156 and # 438949187. I don't know if this
is the best approach, but it was the best solution we came up with at
the time.
--Ann
Ann Myers
Special Collections Cataloger
Morris Library Mail Code 6632
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
605 Agriculture Drive
Carbondale, IL 62901
618-453-1499
amyers at lib.siu.edu
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
Behalf Of Ryan
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 11:40 AM
To: 'DCRM Revision Group List'
Subject: [DCRM-L] Cataloging of single leaves
Has anyone approached the cataloging of an individual leaf (or leaves)
in a manner in which the physical description reflects only what you
have (vs. DCRM(B) 5B1.1)? The question is prompted by a loan request in
which the requester did not realize that our "copy" was merely two
leaves of a publication. This information is stated in a local note, but
one of our public services librarians feels that this is not a very user
friendly way of saying we have only two leaves.
Thanks,
Ryan
--
Ryan Hildebrand
Book Cataloging Dept. Head
Harry Ransom Center
University of Texas at Austin
P.O. Box 7219
Austin, TX 78713-7219
512-232-1681
www.hrc.utexas.edu <http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20100406/1eecd993/attachment.htm
More information about the DCRM-L
mailing list