[DCRM-L] double plates vs. folded plate

[Noble, Richard]

I'd think that "folded" is the way to go. It's clearly not intended to be
bound into the gutter, which render this matter unusable; and "folded"
allows for the differences that there might well be in different bindings,
since one could attach these leaves at one edge, to be folded in.

That's the problem with "double" vs. "folded"--different descriptions from
item-level differences, which one always wants to avoid if possible.

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 Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Will Evans <evans at bostonathenaeum.org>
wrote:

> Deborah I’ve attached a few examples of the first situation (can we send
> attachments via DCRM-L?,) which I hope are illustrative. The images cover
> the entire side of a sheet or leaf (verso is blank,) and they are attached
> to a binding stub at the center.
>
>
>
> Prior to the lengthy thread of a few months back, I’m afraid I’ve always
> counted this as 1 folded leaf of plates.
>
>
>
> I’ll have to hunt around for an example of the second situation.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Will
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] *On
> Behalf Of *Deborah J. Leslie
> *Sent:* Monday, June 06, 2016 1:00 PM
> *To:* DCRM Users' Group
> *Subject:* Re: [DCRM-L] double plates vs. folded plate
>
>
>
> Will, can you give us images, to make sure we're all on the same page
> regarding terminology?
>
>
>
> Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. | Senior Cataloger, Folger Shakespeare
> Library | djleslie at folger.edu | 202.675-0369 | 201 East Capitol St., SE,
> Washington, DC 20003 | www. folger.edu | orcid.org/0000-0001-5848-5467
>
>
>
>
>
> *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 *Will Evans
> *Sent:* Monday, 06 June 2016 12:50
> *To:* dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu
> *Subject:* [DCRM-L] double plates vs. folded plate
>
>
>
> Sorry to resurrect this thread. I tried piecing to together some
> understanding of these concepts from the DCRM archives, but I want to be
> sure I’ve arrived at the correct conclusion.
>
>
>
> If I have an unnumbered double plate (one image covering the entire side
> of a sheet of which its verso is blank) bound down the center of the plate,
> attached to a stub in the binding counts as:
>
> [2] leaves of plates
>
>
>
> But if an unnumbered folded plate (one image covering the entire side of a
> sheet of which its verso is blank) is bound-in on one of its edges it is
> counted as:
>
> [1] folded leaf of plates
>
>
>
> I this correct?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
>
> Will
>
>
>
>
>
> *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
>
> Will Evans
>
> National Endowment for the Humanities
>
> Chief Librarian in Charge of Technical Services
>
> Library of the Boston Athenaeum
>
> 10 1/2 Beacon Street
>
> Boston, MA   02108
>
>
>
> Tel:  617-227-0270 ext. 243
>
> Fax: 617-227-5266
>
> www.bostonathenaeum.org
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20160606/428d2627/attachment.html>