[DCRM-L] OCLC cataloging question

[Shiner, Elaine]

Well, I have both variants, so that would mean two new master records, although I suppose I could upgrade the record that mentions the dedication.  If I did that, and then reduced the number of undifferentiated records to 1 by reporting the rest as duplicates, then there would be one record for each variant, and one undifferentiated record. Then  people could clearly see their options, and would be more likely to link to the right record. Wouldn't that be a little less muddled?

Elaine Shiner

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Deborah J. Leslie
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2014 3:14 PM
To: DCRM Users' Group
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] OCLC cataloging question

Hi Elaine.

This issue came up several years ago at MASC. The consensus was that the only scrupulous thing to do is to create a new record in which you describe your issue and make a "Two issues are noted" note. It's only in this way that you avoid adding to the muddle, even though it means yet another master record.

Deborah J. Leslie | Folger Shakespeare Library | djleslie at folger.edu<mailto:djleslie at folger.edu> | 202.675-0369 | 201 East Capitol St., SE, Washington, DC 20003 | www. folger.edu

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu> [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Shiner, Elaine
Sent: Thursday, 05 June 2014 13:50
To: DCRM Users' Group
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] OCLC cataloging question

Hello:

This is a variation of an theme that has come up before.

In the process of adding a copy to an Aldine record, I discovered that I actually had a different issue.  In my issue, the title-page was a different setting of type, but with exactly the same text.  Also, the printer's devices on the t.p. and final leaves were very similar in the 2 issues, but not identical.  The issues are easy to identify because 1 has a dedication and summary (Argumentum) on the t.p. verso, while the t.p. verso of the other is blank.

I haven't noticed any description of the 2 issues in any bibliographies that I've checked (although to begin with, I wasn't looking for that).

OCLC has more than 10 records for this edition, with various numbers of holdings attached.  Only one of these records the dedication as a contents item, but it doesn't make any mention of another issue.

If I decided to make a new dcrmb OCLC record for the "other" issue, I'm not sure which issue to describe, since all the other OCLC records, save 1, (and their holdings) could represent either issue.

If I changed 1 record to say "Two issues are noted ...," describing the two issues, I could then report all other qualifying OCLC records for that edition as duplicates.

What is the best thing to do, in this case?

Elaine Shiner,
Rare Book Cataloger
Houghton Library
eshiner at fas.harvard.edu<mailto:eshiner at fas.harvard.edu>




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20140605/b263dc3a/attachment.html>