[DCRM-L] printing variations

[Noble, Richard]

This is a singularly bad restriction, by the way. Relegating such key
bibliographical information to a note essentially conceals it, most
importantly in the briefer displays that appear in results lists. Absent
a distinguishing element "higher" than the 5XX level, we end up with
concealed editions that are concealed also from the eye of the catalog
user.

 

In previous discussions there seemed to be discomfort with this strategy
because catalogers might not agree on the exact terminology to use,
absent an edition statement. That seems like a classic case of a dog
being wagged by the tail. 

 

That said, or barked, there are elements of Charles's book that can be
shovelled into the 260 field, there to wave their little flags. (I note
that the Google Books repro of the Auburn 'Derby and Miller' edition has
a stereotyper's statement on the t.p. verso. These things are mighty
slippery...)

 

 

RICHARD NOBLE : RARE BOOKS CATALOGER : JOHN HAY LIBRARY : BROWN
UNIVERSITY
PROVIDENCE, RI 02912 : 401-863-1187/FAX 863-2093 :
RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU 

 

 

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
Behalf Of Randal Brandt
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 2:57 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] printing variations

 

DCRM(B) does not allow for bracketed information in edition statements,
except in special cases covered under 2B4. If necessary, distinguish
between these types of "editions" by using notes. 

And, it was Richard who first brought up bracketing 250 information (see
below), which was the only quibble that I had with his advice :-) 

Randy


Charles F Tremper wrote: 

For some reason, I thought we would need one ... now that I think again,
I'm not sure why.

 

Thanks chas.

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20100302/969a8819/attachment.htm