[DCRM-L] Extent for 2 v. in 1

[Deborah J. Leslie]

Michelle, what's the book?

Deborah J. Leslie | Folger Shakespeare Library | djleslie at folger.edu |

From: DCRM-L [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Robert Steele
Sent: Thursday, 30 August, 2018 07:32
To: DCRM Users' Group
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Extent for 2 v. in 1

Michelle:

Some questions: Are there 2 separate title pages? I see the pagination is not continuous. What about the signatures? Are they also discontinuous between the two volumes?  If your copy has been bound as a single volume, but you have multiple indications that there are in fact 2 intended volumes, I think the 300 should describe the *manifestation as intended * (two volumes), with a note about how your particular copy is bound (1 volume).

In the 300 $$a, I would go with "2 volumes (XXXII, 67 pages; [3], XXXIV, [1], 4-70 pages)" [note the semicolon between volumes; I suppose it's debatable whether "pages" should be repeated]. If you know how the plates were intended to be bound, I would include the number of plates with the pagination for each volume. Of course, the full pagination could also be in a note. Another note might read: UCSD copy: Bound subsequent to publication as a single volume.

If what you have is a nineteenth-century book in a publisher's binding, I suppose you could argue the the issue in a single volume was intended, which would change everything.

I'll be interested in what others think.

Bob Steele
GW Law



On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 6:36 PM, Mascaro, Michelle <mmascaro at ucsd.edu<mailto:mmascaro at ucsd.edu>> wrote:
In RDA for multipart monographs where the number of bibliographic volumes differs from the number of physical volumes instead of recording the extent as, for example, 8 volumes in 5 you record the extent in terms of physical volumes, and then you make a note about the difference.

For those who are creating RDA compatible DCRM(B) descriptions, how are you handling extent for cases where you have 2 bibliographic volumes in 1 physical volume? Since there is only one physical volume, following DCRM conventions you would record the complete pagination or foliation sequences (and not the LC-PCC PS recommendation of 1 volume (various pagings)).  In these situations do you keep the sequences for each bibliographic volume separate (e.g., XXXII, 67, [1], [38] leaves of plates ; [2], XXXIV, [1], 4-70 pages, [54] leaves of plates) or combine them (e.g., XXXII, 67, [3], XXXIV, [1], 4-70 pages, [92] leaves of plates)?

(N.B. Asking as a cataloger, who is currently cataloging a 2 v. in 1, and not as the RBMS Policy Statements Editor.)

Thank you,

Michelle Mascaro
Head, Special Collections Metadata
University of California, San Diego
(858) 534-6759
mmascaro at ucsd.edu<mailto:mmascaro at ucsd.edu>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20180830/4a61ccfa/attachment-0001.html>