I agree with Kevin's analysis of the limitations of this draft LCRI.

John B. Wright
6742 HBLL
Brigham Young University
Provo, Utah 84602
(801) 422-5246
[log in to unmask]


-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Kevin M. Randall
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 12:07 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: draft LCRI 12.6B1

I agree with Judy that the provision in the revised RI 12.6B1 helps to
include the series title in a series index.

However, I disagree about the numbered/unnumbered aspect.  The principle
in
RI 21.30L that I think Judy is referring to appears to be about giving
access to a main series and subseries when the title proper is an
analytic
title, not the subseries itself.  If the reason for giving a series
heading
is to get the record indexed by series title, the numbered/unnumbered
status of the main series is entirely irrelevant--especially given the
fact
that the numbering is eliminated from the series heading.  In the
example
in the revised RI, it can't be determined from the transcription and
tracing whether or not the main series is numbered.  So, if "Research
papers in psychology" was actually unnumbered, what would be the
difference?

Paul alludes to something that needs more clarification:  There are
really
two kinds of numbering that need to be kept in mind.

         1.  Each volume in the main series has a unique main series
number.

                 Main series ; v. 12. Subseries ; v. 1
                 Main series ; v. 28. Subseries ; v. 2
                 Main series ; v. 33. Subseries ; v. 3

         2.  The subseries has a main series number and a subseries
number
(or perhaps chronological designation), and each volume of the subseries
will have the same main series number on it.

                 Main series ; v. 12. Subseries ; v. 1
                 Main series ; v. 12. Subseries ; v. 2
                 Main series ; v. 12. Subseries ; v. 3

Here, "Subseries" constitutes v. 12 of "Main series".  Paul's example is
of
this kind.  I think the "unnumbered" aspect should be removed from the
RI.  And maybe examples of both kinds of situations should be given (the
existing example, and the one Paul gives).

Kevin M. Randall
Head of Serials Cataloging
Northwestern University Library
1970 Campus Drive
Evanston, IL  60208-2300
email: [log in to unmask]
phone: (847) 491-2939
fax:   (847) 491-4345

At 12:12 PM 5/23/2003, Judith A Kuhagen wrote:
>Paul,
>         I want to explain more about the revision to LCRI 12.6B1.
>
>         A separate access point for a numbered main series is required
>for two reasons:  (1) not all indexing includes 245 in a series search;
>(2) the principle in LCRI 21.30L about a separate access point for a
>numbered main series (not an unnumbered series).
>
>         In the example, "Part A" is not the numbering for the main
>series; it is the subseries designation.  The numbering generally isn't
>recorded in series statements in serial bibliographic records.
>
>                         Judy
>
>
> >>> "Paul J. Weiss" <[log in to unmask]> 04/25/03 01:09PM >>>
>I am not sure what the value is in the proposed new section of the RI.
>The
>series title already appears, and can be indexed from, the title
>proper.
>This seems like extra work for little benefit. Also, why would this be
>
>limited to numbered main series?
>
>If this section is added to the RI, the example does not seem to
>illustrate
>what is being discussed.  Shouldn't it be something like the
>following?
>
>245 00 $a Research papers in psychology. $n Part A, $p Behavior
>modification studies
>440 #0 $a Research papers in psychology ; $v pt. A
>
>Paul J.Weiss
>UCSD NACO Coordinator