[DCRM-L] Wove papers: local note or not?

[Schneider, Nina]

Kate
 
I would assume (for all the reasons you just gave) that wove paper is
not a local note. I see a lot of blue paper. I don't think you should
consider that local either. 
 
Have you tried searching in OCLC to see how other libraries are handling
these type of evidentiary tracings?
 
Nina

________________________________

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
Behalf Of Kate Moriarty
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 4:28 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: [DCRM-L] Wove papers: local note or not?


I noticed in example 45 of _Examples to Accompany Descriptive Cataloging
of Rare Books_ (2nd ed.) that wove papers are not considered a local
note or local genre/form term (there is no $5 [INSTITUTION CODE]
following the 500 or 655). Do you treat wove papers as common to most
copies? Is the assumption that printers worked from large piles of
paper, probably from the same stock? Does the date of printing impact
your decision? Items I have date from the 1790s to 1810, fairly early in
wove paper's general use.

And would that approach also apply to colored papers? I have a 1796
English pamphlet printed on blue paper. I don't know enough about the
use of colored papers but I imagine work flow and time constraints would
cause most of the copies to be printed on blue paper, thus making it a
non-local note and non-local genre/form term?

Thanks for your help,

Kate


-- 
Kate S. Moriarty, MSW, MLS  |  Rare Book Catalog Librarian  |  Pius XII
Memorial Library  |  
Saint Louis University  |  3650 Lindell Blvd . |  St. Louis, MO 63108  |
(314) 977-3098 (tel)  |  (314) 977-3108 (fax)  |  moriarks at slu.edu  |
http://libraries.slu.edu/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20090223/f319b527/attachment.htm