Hi Ted:

  Some comments follow.

On Tue, 4 Sep 2012, Ted P Gemberling wrote:

> I catalog mostly old print monographs (before 1910)

  That would make a difference.

  Note that under the "old rules" those oldies were always cataloged by
t.p. date rather than copyright date. Might even be practical to think
about using those "old" rules for those "oldies" consistently (esp. since
"publication" had a different definition then too).

> I assume ...

  First rule of anything (esp. cataloging and politics) is to not "assume"
anything.

> ... they are also taking the printing date as the publication date.

  Possibly. You certainly can't "publish" (* post-1952) a printed monograph
until it is printed. Maybe it's a quibble between the date the first copy
comes off the presses and the first copies go into the warehouses for
distribution. Still, you can't say a pbk. iteration that did not exist
until years after a hbk. iteration had the same "publication" (or
printing) date.

  (*) Publication = "the reproduction in tangible form and the general
distribution to the public of copies of a work from which it can be read
or otherwise visually perceived" [UCC, 1952], or, "distribution of copies
to the general public with the consent of the author" [BCIA, 1989]

Cheers!

jgm

  John G. Marr
  Cataloger
  CDS, UL
  Univ. of New Mexico
  Albuquerque, NM 87131
  [log in to unmask]
  [log in to unmask]


     **There are only 2 kinds of thinking: "out of the box" and "outside
the box."

Opinions belong exclusively to the individuals expressing them, but
sharing is permitted.