[DCRM-L] A DCRM(B) query

[Deborah J. Leslie]

John,

 

This problem came to light during the RBMS and Beinecke workshops on
cataloging ephemera, although I hadn't noticed the problematic example.
You're right; it should be deleted entirely from 5B14.1. 

 

This whole section needs revision. In 5B14.1, the phrase "(whether
issued folded or unfolded)" is non-sensical. The only way to know if
something was issued folded is by how it's printed, so something is
either issued as a single unfolded sheet (regardless of how it was
stored later), or a folded sheet printed with one or more panels. In
addition, 5B14.2 is clumsily written (for which I take full blame). 

 

I'm forwarding this to DCRM-L, as the best place (currently) to document
the problem. 

 

__________________________ 
Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. 
Head of Cataloging 
Folger Shakespeare Library 
201 East Capitol St., S.E. 
Washington, D.C. 20003 
202.675-0369 
djleslie at folger.edu | http://www.folger.edu 

 

 

 

 

From: John Lancaster [mailto:jlancaster at amherst.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, 19 May, 2009 12:18
To: Deborah J. Leslie
Subject: A DCRM(B) query

 

Deborah - I'm just cataloguing a folded sheet with panels, and note what
seems to be a contradiction between 5B14.1 and 5B14.2.

 

Namely, the third example in 5B14.1 and the second example in 5B14.2
seem both to be cases where one side of the sheet is divided into
panels, and the other is "designed to be used unfolded", though the
second consists of a map instead of text.

 

What I have fits squarely into 5B14.2, so there's no need to resolve the
issue on my account, though I'd be interested to hear your view of it.

 

Thanks.

 

John

 

--
John Lancaster (jlancaster at amherst.edu)
P.O. Box 775

Williamsburg, Mass. 01096

413-268-7679

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20090519/6854dc78/attachment.htm