[DCRM-L] ESTC printer tracings: a question about assignees

[John Lancaster]

Thanks, Deborah - I’m profoundly ignorant of the LC/NACO rules, and can’t find anything on point in a quick web search.  It seems odd that rules would prohibit making useful and informative references, but I suppose it’s not surprising.

I used to follow the Folger practice of giving the full name in a note, until I realized how the publisher/printer/bookseller is indexed in various OPACs, i.e. from the 260, not from notes or entries.  Though it shouldn’t be too hard to pick up names from the 700/710 entries that have appropriate relators in subfield e (and then you wouldn’t have to worry about inflected forms in Latin imprints, variant forms, typos, and the like, when searching).

I second your comments on Sarah Werner’s blog.


On Dec 7, 2011, at 7:17 PM, Deborah J. Leslie wrote:

> John,
>  
> As I understand it, that kind of reciprocal personal name references are not permitted in the LC/NACO file.
>  
> Regarding how the initials are expanded: I think DCRB allowed it; certainly it was the ESTC convention. DCRM(B) does not allow that practice as an option. The way you illustrate is one option; the other is to transcribe what's there (Folger practice), give the full name in a note, and of course trace. I try to clean these up whenever I'm touching a record--I wasn't in fact working on this record, but responding to a query. It so happens that at this very moment, I'm drafting a blog post on the relationship between ESTC and Hamnet records, and will try to avoid descending into a rant on some of their practices.
>  
> Catalogers in particular might find many of these posts interesting--the blog is coordinated by Sarah Werner, a scholar (not a librarian) in our Research Division, but she's clearly fascinated with cataloging. In addition to cataloging being a main theme, she has specifically solicited catalogers for contributions, and in fact has been hounding me for months to do this one on the ESTC. http://collation.folger.edu/
>  
> From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of John Lancaster
> Sent: Wednesday, 07 December 2011 18:24
> To: DCRM Revision Group List
> Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] ESTC printer tracings: a question about assignees
>  
> Wouldn't this be handled by references?  (Even though there are none as yet.)  "Assign(e) of T. Morley" would refer to Barley; both Barley and Morley would have see also refs. to each other, all with appropriate explanatory notes in the authority record.  (Apparently Morley had more than one assign, separately, and perhaps even simultaneously - but that's another issue.)
>  
> For groups, it seems to me that someone decided that e.g. "Assigns of Edward Sayers" was the preferable form to use for "E. and R. Nutt and R. Gosling (the assignes of Edward Sayers)" [or similar formulations] - and I'm not disagreeing, but I think a case could be made for the form "E. and R. Nutt and R. Gosling", especially since the composition of the group of assigns changed over time (but only the one form is authorized for the assigns).
>  
> Strangely, in this case, there are 500s from "Assigns ..." to the individuals who acted in that capacity but no 500s in the records for the individuals leading to the "Assigns ..." heading.
>  
> A digression:  My practice is to add name information in the form "T.M. [i.e Thomas Morley]", simply because in some (most?) OPACs and other data bases, a search for "printer/publisher" looks at the 260 and is put off by internal punctuation, including brackets.  For instance, a search of ESTC for "morley" in the "publisher" field does not turn up this record, but "m[orley" does.  This is widespread in ESTC, and any search for a name not likely to be in controlled field has to take the possibility into account.
>  
> John Lancaster
>  
>  
> On Dec 7, 2011, at 4:17 PM, Deborah J. Leslie wrote:
> 
> 
> London : Printed by [i.e. for] William Barley, the assigne of T. M[orley] and are to be sold at his shop in Gracious streete, 1602. Cum priuilegio.
>  
> http://shakespeare.folger.edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=100307
>  
> For those of you who trace booktrade personnel, what would you do with T. Morley in this record? Trace as bookseller? Not trace at all? Unlike formal groups of assigns, which are given existence as a formal body with reciprocal references to the person who assigned the rights, this is a case of two individuals without any connection embedded in their NARs.
>  
> Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. | Head of Cataloging, Folger Shakespeare Library | 201 East Capitol St., S.E. | Washington, D.C. 20003
> djleslie at folger.edu | 202.675-0369 | http://www.folger.edu  
>  
>  
>   
>  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20111211/bae796ba/attachment-0001.htm