[DCRM-L] Shares citation but varies from PDF

[Noble, Richard]

As I said to Deborah in a side note, I think it helps very much to add (in
this case) the reading of the first line of p. 8 in the
*other*setting--the result in two or, heaven knows, more records is a
set of
reciprocal notes, each of which is sufficient to obviate the need for
inference on the part of the catalog user. Who knows? There might be a
third setting.

RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY
BROWN UNIVERSITY  ::  PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912  ::  401-863-1187
<Richard_Noble at Br <RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU>own.edu>


On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Alice Hanes <ahanes at hagley.org> wrote:

>  Elaine and Deborah—
>
> Thank you both for your advice on including the citation and formulating a
> note that would serve to distinguish my book in hand from the version I saw
> linked through an 856 field on OCLC.  This is what I came up with:
>
> 500         Two settings of type are noted. In this setting, the first
> line of text on p. 8 reads "Parmi les vues politiques dont vous remplirez
> votre." Martin & Walter does not distinguish between different settings of
> type.
>
> 510  4_  Martin & Walter. Révolution française,[c]III, 24452
>
> Here’s my follow-up question:  Should these notes have been added to the
> established record (#222640157) on OCLC, even with its link to a PDF of
> varying text, or was I justified in contributing a new master record
> (#869008399) of my own?  Can one suffer from too much information – and too
> little – at the same time?  I’m not so sure, and I have alerted
> bibchange at oclc.org to the situation.  What I’m learning through this
> experience will help me through another in the future, j'espère.
>
>
>
> Alice H. Hanes
>
> Technical Services Librarian
>
> Hagley Museum and Library
>
> 298 Buck Road East
>
> Wilmington, DE 19807-0630
>
> (302) 658-2400 x234
>
>
>
> *From:* dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] *On
> Behalf Of *Shiner, Elaine
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 29, 2014 1:00 PM
>
> *To:* DCRM Users' Group
> *Subject:* Re: [DCRM-L] Shares citation but varies from PDF
>
>
>
> I think Deborah is right about the reference to Martin & Walter. Leaving
> it out is maybe a bit lazy J.
>
>
>
> Elaine
>
>
>
> *From:* dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] *On
> Behalf Of *Deborah J. Leslie
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 28, 2014 3:47 PM
> *To:* DCRM Users' Group
> *Subject:* Re: [DCRM-L] Shares citation but varies from PDF
>
>
>
> Hello Alice and Elaine,
>
>
>
> If I understand the situation correctly, I agree with Elaine. I would cite
> Martin & Walter, and in the note you make that distinguishes the two
> editions, add something to the effect that Martin & Walter does not
> distinguish between the two editions. Make no reference to the OCLC record
> or link. Here's an example of a record I did just last week:
> http://shakespeare.folger.edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=264765
>
>
>
> Also take close look at your text. I'd bet that "occafion" is really "
> occaſion."
>
>
>
>
>
> Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. | Folger Shakespeare Library | 201 East
> Capitol St., S.E. | Washington, D.C. 20003 | djleslie at folger.edu |
> 202.675-0369 | http://www.folger.edu
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu<dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu>]
> On Behalf Of Shiner, Elaine
> Sent: Monday, 27 January 2014 16:40
> To: DCRM Users' Group
> Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Shares citation but varies from PDF
>
>
>
> Dear Alice:
>
>
>
> I don't think that's a good idea, since you have no control over the
> links.  If I couldn't find any difference that could justify a new OCLC
> record, I would insert a 500 note into the master record, but without
> referring to the link.  For instance, "Two editions are noted." or "Two
> setting of type are noted", and then: In one, the last line of text on p.
> [5] reads:  ". occafion plus favorable pour confondre vos en- .."; in the
> other, the last line of text on p. [5] reads "[whatever it reads in the
> electronic resource]"  I don't think it's necessary to mention Martin &
> Walter, as long as the description in Martin & Walter could refer to either.
>
>
>
> Elaine Shiner,
>
> Rare Book Cataloger
>
> Houghton Library
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu<dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu>]
> On Behalf Of Alice Hanes
>
> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 2:26 PM
>
> To: DCRM Users' Group
>
> Subject: [DCRM-L] Shares citation but varies from PDF
>
>
>
> Dear colleagues--  We are converting some French Revolution pamphlets to
> MARC records from catalog cards, many of which include citations.  The one
> in hand cites  Martin & Walter, III, 24452, which is further linked through
> (OCoLC) 12938925 to an electronic resource that has the same page count
> but  different type-set.  I'm wondering whether I should note mine as a
> variant through a note such as the one below and would appreciate hearing
> how any of you might handle this situation.  Thank you.
>
>
>
> 500            This ed. varies from electronic resource linked to (OCoLC)
> 12938925 which also cites Martin & Walter. Révolution française. III,
> 24452.  Last line of text on p. [5] reads:  ". occafion plus favorable pour
> confondre vos en- .."
>
>
>
> 510  4  Martin & Walter. Révolution française, [c]III, 24452
>
>
>
> Alice H. Hanes
>
> Technical Services Librarian
>
> Hagley Museum and Library
>
> 298 Buck Road East
>
> Wilmington, DE 19807-0630
>
> (302) 658-2400 x234
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20140129/9721ee96/attachment-0001.html>