[DCRM-L] Collation: partially duplicated signing

[John Lancaster]

Randal - I think any of the three choices you suggest (as well as [a]) could be defended, more or less, but I agree with your choice of pi.  Neither Gaskell nor Bowers is at all comprehensive - they couldn't be, I think, so cataloguer's (or bibliographer's) judgment is still a significant component of the descriptive process.

John Lancaster


On Oct 03, 2011, at 12:50 PM, Randal Brandt <rbrandt at library.berkeley.edu> wrote:

> I am cataloging a book with partially duplicated signatures and would
> like some advice. The book is an octavo in 4's and the preliminaries are
> signed as follows:
>
> unsigned gathering, B, b-i
>
> The main text is then signed:
>
> B-3X
>
> My question is about the initial unsigned gathering. Would it be
> recorded as '[A]', '[superscript pi][A]', or 'pi'? The second gathering
> has to be signed '[superscript pi]B' because of the duplicated B
> gathering that begins the text. At this point I'm leaning towards 'pi'
> since 'A' is not used in any of the subsequent sequences, resulting in a
> signature statement as follows:
>
> pi^4 [superscript pi]B^4, b-i^4, B-3X^4
>
> Any other suggestions? I've looked at Gaskell p. 331 and Bowers p. 219+,
> but do not see this particular situation.
>
> Thanks!
>
> -- 
> __________________________
> Randal Brandt
> Principal Cataloger
> The Bancroft Library
> (510) 643-2275
> rbrandt at library.berkeley.edu
> http://bancroft.berkeley.edu
> "It's hard enough to remember my opinions without
> remembering my reasons for them"--The Streets.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20111003/89f13fb7/attachment.htm