[DCRM-L] Using manuscript waste (term vs. practice)

[Carpenter, Jane]

Ah yes, of course.  That's what I meant to say.

-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Schneider, Nina
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 4:23 PM
To: DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Using manuscript waste (term vs. practice)

Thanks, Jane. I might stick with Manuscript waste since the "waste" is a hand-written letter, rather than something printed.

Nina

-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Carpenter, Jane
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 3:39 PM
To: 'DCRM Users' Group'
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Using manuscript waste (term vs. practice)

Nina,
The term Printed waste should probably be de-coupled from its binding qualifier.  If "Printed waste" were instead part of the materials vocabulary that CV is contemplating building, it could be used in a variety of contexts

For immediate use, I would use Printed waste (Binding), which I think is more descriptive than Mending, especially if you consider "binding" to refer to the structure of the book as a whole,  not limited to  just the covers.  (Unfortunately this reasoning wouldn't apply to the question of the single printed song sheet that Andrea describes).    
Jane 

Jane F. Carpenter
Special Collections Cataloger
UCLA Library Special Collections



-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Schneider, Nina
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:47 AM
To: DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Using manuscript waste (term vs. practice)

I didn't get a response to this, so it's still up in the air. Any opinions out there????

Thanks!

Nina

-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Cawelti, Andrea
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:03 AM
To: dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu
Subject: [DCRM-L] Using manuscript waste (term vs. practice)

Hey Nina, as it turns out, I have an analogous situation, where a single printed song sheet has been repaired on the verso with printed waste.  No binding involved.  Is there any "legal" way to use Printed waste, outside of the binding thesaurus?
Grateful thanks, andrea
-- 
(Ms.) Andrea Cawelti 
Ward Music Cataloger 
Houghton Library 
Harvard University 
Cambridge, MA  02138 

Phone: (617) 495-8060 
FAX: (617) 495-1376 
E-mail: cawelti at fas.harvard.edu 



-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Schneider, Nina
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 6:29 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List (dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu)
Subject: [DCRM-L] Using manuscript waste (term vs. practice)

Hi all,

I have a French book (1785) that has a damaged half-title leaf. As a repair, this leaf has been mounted on what appears to be a 19th C. letter (the verso of the letter is blank and it has been adhered, text-side down, making it difficult to read). 

I'd like to trace this situation in my catalog record. Is this an appropriate time to use "manuscript waste" in the RBMS Controlled Vocabularies Binding Terms thesaurus? I've never used the term and I usually think of manuscript waste as part of the binding, rather than the repair of a page, but just wanted to get an opinion before adding it.

Thanks!

Nina

+---------------
Nina M. Schneider
Rare Books Librarian
William Andrews Clark Memorial Library
2520 Cimarron Street
Los Angeles, CA  90018
(323) 731-8529

nschneider at humnet.ucla.edu
http://www.clarklibrary.ucla.edu/

** Please note that the Clark Library will be CLOSED for our seismic retrofit beginning in April 2015 **
****************************************************************************