Difference between revisions of "Talk:Nonce collections"

(created page)
 
(→‎Analytics in OCLC: new section)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
Need to recollect and document why we made this decision. It makes sense in OCLC, where we're cataloging the analytics as if they were original issue, but why not change to 'a' in Hamnet? --[[User:DeborahLeslie|Deborah J. Leslie]] ([[User talk:DeborahLeslie|talk]]) 13:59, 14 March 2019 (EST)
 
Need to recollect and document why we made this decision. It makes sense in OCLC, where we're cataloging the analytics as if they were original issue, but why not change to 'a' in Hamnet? --[[User:DeborahLeslie|Deborah J. Leslie]] ([[User talk:DeborahLeslie|talk]]) 13:59, 14 March 2019 (EST)
 +
 +
== Analytics in OCLC ==
 +
 +
While cataloging the nonce collection "The works of Mrs. Eliza Haywood," I am re-thinking the plan of cataloging the analytics as monographs. Case-by-case? For whatever reason, it seems much more reasonable to catalog them as analytics. Otherwise, we're giving false information about the nature of our piece. --[[User:DeborahLeslie|Deborah J. Leslie]] ([[User talk:DeborahLeslie|talk]]) 14:42, 14 March 2019 (EST)

Latest revision as of 14:42, 14 March 2019

Need to recollect and document why we made this decision. It makes sense in OCLC, where we're cataloging the analytics as if they were original issue, but why not change to 'a' in Hamnet? --Deborah J. Leslie (talk) 13:59, 14 March 2019 (EST)

Analytics in OCLC

While cataloging the nonce collection "The works of Mrs. Eliza Haywood," I am re-thinking the plan of cataloging the analytics as monographs. Case-by-case? For whatever reason, it seems much more reasonable to catalog them as analytics. Otherwise, we're giving false information about the nature of our piece. --Deborah J. Leslie (talk) 14:42, 14 March 2019 (EST)