[DCRM-L] Statement of extent

[Erin Blake]

Advance warning: this message is not about what RDA should or shouldn’t say (hence the new subject line), it’s an honest question from someone who comes to Rare Book cataloging via Graphic Materials cataloging).

Why does the traditional bibliographic statement of extent go beyond “extent” to include the numbering of that extent? Why not put the (sometimes lengthy) pagination/foliation in a note, the way signatures are handled, and have the entire 300 field be non-transcribed?

For recent publications, it’s pretty easy to figure out about how long the book will be (e.g. “368 p.”). But when I see “[18], 303, [1], 46, 49-100, [2], 69-232, [2], 79-80, [26], 98, [2], 109-156, 257-993 [i.e. 399], [1] p.” I can’t grasp much more than “gee, it’ll be a pretty thick book.”

I’d really rather have the best of both worlds:
300 __ $a 766 p. $b 1 portr. (engraving) ; $c 35 cm (fol.)
500 __ $a Pagination: [18], 303, [1], 46, 49-100, [2], 69-232, [2], 79-80, [26], 98, [2], 109-156, 257-993 [i.e. 399], [1].
500 __ $a Signatures: [superscript pi]A⁶([superscript pi]A1+1, [superscript pi]A5+1.2), A-2B⁶, 2C², a-g⁶, [superscript chi]2g⁸, h-v⁶, x⁴, "gg3.4"(±"gg3"), [par.]-2[par.]⁶, 3[par.]1, 2a-2f⁶, 2g², "Gg⁶", 2h⁶, 2k-3b⁶.

Apologies if the pagination doesn’t actually add up to 766; you get my drift.

Thanks,

    Erin.

--------------------------------------------------
Erin C. Blake, Ph.D.  |  Curator of Art & Special Collections  |  Folger Shakespeare Library  |  201 E. Capitol St. SE  |  Washington, DC 20003-1004  |  office tel. (202) 675-0323  |  fax:  (202) 675-0328  |  eblake at folger.edu<mailto:eblake at folger.edu>  |  www.folger.edu<http://www.folger.edu/> |  collation.folger.edu<http://collation.folger.edu/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20120817/41527e98/attachment.htm>