[DCRM-L] 8vo: another mass update gone awry?

[Noble, Richard]

I believe that Noah has nailed the probable source as a BL batchload--I've
noticed a few, and that seems to be the context. My guess is that they
occur in records that have "8vo" as the *only* measurement in 300 $c -- as
a size, without dimensions, not a bibliographical format statement (so, for
instance, many a small 8vo ends up as as "12m0" or "16mo").

And yes, if the purpose of the 340 $m is to record a format known from
actual bibliographical analysis (which *can* be a bit trickier than the
various rules of thumb would indicate), then such wholesale translation of
a very different idea of "format" frustrates the purpose of the field.

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 Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 11:31 AM Noah Sheola <sheola at bc.edu> wrote:

> I've been wondering about this as well. I've seen *a lot* of these over
> the last month or so, and I share Bob's concern. The common feature I have
> discerned for many (possibly all?) is a British Library Group Batchload.
> Also, even in records where the  "340 ǂm 8vo" might be appropriate, I don't
> believe the ǂm should end with a period, as do all of the records with this
> issue I have seen.
> Regards,
> Noah
>
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 11:15 AM Robert Steele <rosteele at law.gwu.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> I apologize for posting to multiple lists.
>>
>> I have been noticing non-DCRM(B) records in OCLC with a bibliographic
>> format field (340  ǂm 8vo. ǂ2 rdabf). For anyone not familiar with it, the
>> rdabf tag refers to the RDA Bibliographic Format registry  (rdabf:
>> https://www.rdaregistry.info/termList/bookFormat/)
>>
>> Unfortunately, in many cases these are books from the machine-made era.
>> Here is an example from 1863: OCLC 14985739. The definition of 8vo in the
>> Registry is, as it should be: "A bibliographic format consisting of one or
>> more leaves that are 1/8 of the whole sheet," and of course, the size of
>> the original sheet is very difficult to ascertain in a book produced in
>> 1863 on machine-made paper.
>>
>> The records I have found so far are lacking a 300 $$c subfield. They also
>> were originally entered into OCLC decades ago, but were recently updated.
>> My guess is somebody decided to strip 8vo from the end of 300 and move it
>> to an rda field. Unfortunately, they failed to consider that many older
>> records used 8vo as a general indicator of size, and not as "Bibliographic
>> Format" as defined in the registry, so we end up with records with missing
>> and erroneous information.
>>
>> I'll be fixing this one soon, but I wonder how many there are.
>>
>> Bob Steele
>> Cataloging Librarian
>> Jacob Burns Law Library
>> George Washington University
>>
>
>
> --
> Noah Sheola
> Special Collections Cataloging Librarian
> John J. Burns Library
> Boston College
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20190125/a2795356/attachment.html>