[DCRM-L] edition, state

[John Lancaster]

It seems to me that the impositions are rather separate printings (impressions), not issues - issues are sub-units of a single impression, and clearly so much has to happen between the printing of an edition in 8vo imposition, and the same edition in 12mo imposition, that they can’t be considered part of the same impression.

They certainly aren’t different editions, by definition - the setting of type is the same, even if the text is “overrun” (i.e. the measure of the line is changed), which sometimes, though not always, occurs along with re-imposition.  Often all that happens is that the number of lines on a page changes, and the margins may be different - though not necessarily, if a different size paper is used.  Sometimes not even the number of lines per page changes - just the arrangement of pages in the chase.

John Lancaster


On Feb 7, 2011, at 11:53 AM, Deborah J. Leslie wrote:

> 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
> 
>