DCRM(S) pt. 0A

[Robert L. Maxwell]

At 07:02 PM 1/29/01 -0500, you wrote:
>0A.1. par. 4.
>
>         "Is an annual publication really only issued once during the
>year?  If so, consider treating monographically.  Some early almanacs,
>for example, were published more often than once a year, frequently with
>a change in the publisher or the person responsible for the astronomical
>calculations."
>         This is an improvement over the earlier version, but it's still
>difficult to tell what you want to emphasize. If you want to say that a
>serial published no more frequently than annually ought perhaps to be
>cataloged as a monograph, then a clearer wording might be: "Is it an
>annual publication? If so, consider cataloging as a monograph. Be aware,
>however, of self-titled annual publications that often published more
>often than once a year, such as almanacs." Still, I wonder why you want
>to be gearing annual serials toward monographic cataloging?I know the
>ESTC has treated annuals as monographs, but I don't see any reason why
>annuals might more appropriately be cataloged as monographs than as what
>they are--serials.

Deborah took this to mean the opposite of how I understood it, which 
illustrates that it is still confusing. I took the original rule to mean 
that if something calling itself an annual publication (e.g., an almanac) 
was in fact published *more* often than annually we should consider 
treating it instead as a monograph. I still interpret the language "is it 
*really* only issued once during the year" to mean "is it in fact issued 
*more* than once a year?" This was my original objection. It seems 
counter-intuitive to say that if it is an annual we will treat it as a 
serial, but if it is actually published *more* often we will treat it as a 
bunch of monographs. On the other hand, I thought the revised language 
above was supposed to convey that the fact that, say, an almanac claims to 
be annual, but we actually have more than one for a given year, further 
investigation might reveal to us that what we actually have is *different* 
works, by different publishers, etc., and that are in fact a bunch of 
monographs. But Deborah is right, I think what you want to get at is still 
unclear, as evidenced by our wildly different interpretations of the language.

Bob
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Robert L. Maxwell
Special Collections and Ancient Languages Cataloger
6430 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801) 378-5568
robert_maxwell@byu.edu
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=