[DCRM-L] edition, state

[Lawler, Martha]

I agree with Lenore and Deborah and I would also add a note to the 12mo record indicating the 8vo version -- just to keep things synchronized (e.g. "The same setting of type was also printed using an 8vo imposition.")

Martha Lawler
James Smith Noel Collection
LSU-Shreveport


 
This message is intended only for the use of the Addressee(s) and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL, and/or EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this communication in error, please destroy all copies of the message, whether in electronic or hard copy format, as well as attachments and immediately contact the sender by replying to this email.
 
-----Original Message-----
 

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Deborah J. Leslie
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2011 10:54 AM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] edition, state

In bibliographical terms, the 8vo and 12mo impositions are different 'issues', which according to DCRM(B), get different records. Since it's a pre-1801 imprint, it will not be subjected to OCLC de-duping. And if our request to OCLC goes through, since it will have an 040 ‡e dcrmb, it will doubly not be subjected to automatic de-duping.

-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Lenore Rouse
Sent: Monday, 07 February, 2011 12:14
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] edition, state

  Hi Larry,

Interesting question. I would opine that the answer to #1 should be yes 
even if it IS the same setting of type, or at least I would certainly 
want different records to record different formats. The printer may not 
be changing individual type pages but he is bound to have to change the 
imposition of those pages. As to #2 I'm not sure how relentless the 
de-dupe juggernaut is, but one would hope that there will be sufficient 
difference between the size, pagination, etc. of the books to preserve 
your new record. Including the format and collation should help.

However it occurs to me this may all be moot as I dimly remember reading 
that auto de-duping or merging of records is not being used for pre-1800 
material? Look forward to more discussion on this.
Lenore


On 2/7/2011 11:26 AM, Laurence Creider wrote:
> I am cataloging The miscellaneous works of Tobias Smollett, M.D.  
> London : Printed for J. Mundell & Co., Edinburgh, and for J. Mundell, 
> College, Glasgow, 1796.  I have 5 of the six volumes.  The copies I 
> have found in WorldCat give the format as 8vo with a note: The same 
> setting of type was also printed using a 12 imposition.  Our copy is 
> in 12mo, with horizontal signatures.
>
> Two different but not un-related issues.
>
> 1) Does using the same setting of type with a different imposition 
> count as a separate edition?
>
> 2) Should I input a separate record into OCLC for the 12mo version? If 
> so, how would I qualify it to avoid the dreaded OCLC de-duplication 
> algorithm?
>

-- 
Lenore M. Rouse
Curator, Rare Books&  Special Collections
The Catholic University of America
Room 214, Mullen Library
620 Michigan Avenue N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20064

PHONE: 202 319-5090
E-MAIL: rouse at cua.edu