[DCRM-L] almanac dating and fixed fields

[Cloyed, Ellen]

Speaking as a serials cataloger, I always choose to catalog almanacs as serials, which solves the problem, but allows for adds to the collection in future.

Cordially,

Ellen Cloyed
Serials and Special Collections Cataloger
E.G. Swem Library
College of William and Mary
Williamsburg, Va. 23187
(757)22103100
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Nipps, Karen
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 10:14 AM
To: DCRM Users' Group
Subject: [DCRM-L] almanac dating and fixed fields

Hi, All - I know this subject has come up before, so I apologize for the resurrection should my question be redundant ....

It is quite common in almanac printing that the date of printing precedes the year for which a given almanac was issued by one year. So, for instance, if the imprint date of an almanac is 1760, this might be expressed in the MARC record's imprint field as "... 1760 [i.e. 1759?]". My question is, what do people do about the fixed fields to represent both dates? My cloudy memory recalls that the community was considering putting in a request to the powers-that-be for a new publication status (008/06) - did this ever get any traction? Thanks. - Karen

Karen Nipps
Head, Rare Book Team
Houghton Library
Harvard University
Cambridge, MA 02138
Phone: 617-496-9190
FAX: 617-495-1376

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20150710/deac1238/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 2051 bytes
Desc: image002.gif
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20150710/deac1238/attachment-0001.gif>