[DCRM-L] Glossary Terms: Perfect/Imperfect

[Stephen Skuce]

"Perfect" and "Imperfect" gave Nina, Randy, and me plenty of trouble when 
we worked on these terms.

The major concern with our draft definition of "perfect copy," as I 
understand it, is that "free of errors in printing" goes too far: most 
published matter has "errors in printing."  I can agree with that.  But I 
don't think we can simply drop the phrase and have an adequate 
definition.  And I don't think imperfections occur only after publication.

In DCRM(B), the word "imperfect" (with variants "imperfection" and 
"imperfections") is used repeatedly; the word "perfect" is used only 
once.  In the text proper (that is, outside the appendices), "imperfect" 
refers pretty much exclusively to incompleteness (0B2, 5B12) -- 
specifically, incompleteness that could interfere with the creation of an 
accurate, complete description of the manifestation.  The draft glossary 
definition for "imperfect copy" reflects this.

The draft glossary definition for "perfect copy" went a bit further, 
because in its sole appearance in DCRM(B) the term references, essentially, 
a copy of the manifestation that provides information sufficient for the 
preparation of a complete and adequate description.

In my experience, most, but not all, imperfections occur after books leave 
the printer's/publisher's hands. If on a given copy the second author's 
name, or the printing date, is utterly illegible not because the page is 
torn but, say, due to overinking or to missing characters, the cataloger is 
expected to supply the second author's name or printing date, without 
brackets, if its presentation on other, "perfect" copies can be reliably 
determined.  For purposes of 0B2 -- the only occurrence of the word 
"perfect" in DCRM(B) -- our definition must be about more than the folding 
and order of sheets. It is clearly about the presence (and legibility) of 
information.

A complete absence of printing errors is not what we require for 
cataloging.  We do require legibility sufficient to create an adequate 
description. Most of what we catalog is real books. Some of what we catalog 
is pretty flimsy: people will use DCRM(B) to catalog very poorly produced 
material that left the printing press in barely legible form.  0B2, 
happily, does not refer specifically to tears or missing leaves or other 
post-production mishaps. It's about missing information.

I think we can adjust the definition of "perfect" slightly to remove the 
word "printing" and replace it with something about legibility, like this:

Perfect copy. A copy of a publication that is known to be physically 
complete and arranged in the exact order as intended to be issued. Free of 
errors in printing and folding. Applies to the physical structure of a book 
and to the completeness and legibility of its contents.

Stephen
P.S. Pack your long johns. The forecast for Boston for Saturday through 
Monday is temps barely hitting 30, with lows in the teens. Sorry everyone.

| Stephen Skuce  |  Rare Books Cataloging Librarian
| MIT Libraries  |  Building 14E-210B  |  617.253.0654 |  skuce at mit.edu