Talk:Hybrid material

Revision as of 16:36, 18 March 2014 by DeborahLeslie (talk | contribs) (Created page)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Origin of page --Deborah J. Leslie 17:36, 18 March 2014 (EDT)

Editing notes

Moved from original page

At 7/21/10 meeting, those present agreed simple addition of copy-specific notes in existing holdings records could be handled directly by the mss catalogers; all instances requiring *any* intervention in the book bib record (often necessary) and/or adding of a new holdings record should probably still go to the appropriate book cataloger. Okay to add a note of this exception of when coordination with other catalogers is not necessary? Or should I just put this on the manuscript cataloging wiki? (would point to this page for procedures when coordination is necessary, of course) ~nss 7/21/10

Request made by EGB during 7/21/10 meeting: Indicate the correct formulation for the shelfmark for the item awaiting cataloging (while shelfmarks section on wiki gives information on formulation, the assignment of shelfmarks rests with the first cataloger to handle the material & some formulations can be a bit complicated (e.g. $m (printed content) or V.a.593, item 2)

    • Request made 7/21/10: When possible, group notifications of hybrid materials in single e-mail for the convenience of the other cataloger**

%ORANGE%Add an example of a non-interleaved mss item %ENDCOLOR%

%ORANGE% (DJL) For Sammelbands, adding the shelfmark of the other work is overkill, since the note will indicate the location within the volume, and the shelfmarks will differ only by a decimal point or "item x". Plus, if we do not require it here, the contents of such notes will be consistent with printed book bound-withs. ***AEB: Totally right, shelfmark here would be overkill I think I was thinking in terms of STC and Wing numbers for items that have MSS shelfmarks. So reword to: "and STC or Wing numbers if appropriate"?%ENDCOLOR%

 * Make a host item added entry (773) for the work in the other aspect if the relationship is unequal (e.g., single item being cataloged is tipped into a volume containing a larger work). Include ǂ5 DFo if the work you are cataloging is published. %ORANGE%DJL: This is problematic for published material; ǂ5 is not defined for field 773 and is not intended to be used for copy-specific added entries. Since the shelfmarks will be different, can we dispense with the 773, relying on the note and distinct shelfmarks? or use a regular associated work added entry? ***EB: Uh oh. I must have missed something. We used 773 to indicate where extra-illustrations can be found, in the Garrick project, see for example Didn't the Morgan find a way to create hot-links between extra-illustrations and the books they're in? %ENDCOLOR%
  * When working with cards: Make a photocopy of the card(s), front and back, keeping records separate since they may be distributed to different catalogers. %ORANGE%I think some of these skipped annotated items are getting picked up again during clean-up phases of the MSS cataloging project (post-1701 catalogers have already identified several & prepared copy-specific info to be added by the modern materials cataloger, so appropriate to group these/notify by e-mail (rather than ask Eric to work from item+card)?~nss 7/21/10%ENDCOLOR%