John Myers, Mac Elrod and Kelly McGrath have explained in sufficient
detail why the hardback/paperback distinction is not significant or
practical in library cataloging. So I don't know why it keeps coming up.
Yes, that might explain some of the numbers relating to ISBNs, but this
is all-in-all neither an important nor a useful conversation to
continue. ISBNs do NOT IDENTIFY LIBRARY INSTANCES.

Can we move on to a more useful conversation?

kc


On 5/20/13 10:59 AM, Ford, Kevin wrote:
> I had that question, and I'll add another one or three. :)
>
> Both Shlomo's and Roy's data show records with 4 ISBNs within the top 4 places. For Shlomo, 4 ISBNs is in 4th; records with 4 ISBNs are in third for OCLC (comfortably ahead of those records with 1 ISBN). How many of those records with 4 ISBNs represent coupled ISBN-10 and ISBN-13 pairs for the hardback and paperback?
>
> Perhaps that is not permitted in OCLC - I don't know if paperback/hardback distinction merits a new record in OCLC.
>
> If the high number of 2 ISBNs does not reflect the coupling of ISBN-10 and -13 pairs, might those records with 2 ISBNs represent simple hardback/paperback distinction?
>
> Yours,
> Kevin
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Myers, John F.
>> Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 1:26 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Instance of ISBNs in MARC records
>>
>> Hmm, 2 ISBNs in 2nd place -- how many are situations of coupled ISBN-10
>> and ISBN-13 pairs and how many are "distinct"? The "instance" plot
>> thickens. :-)
>>
>> John F. Myers, Catalog Librarian
>> Schaffer Library, Union College
>> Schenectady NY 12308
>>
>> [log in to unmask]
>> 518-388-6623
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> Roy Tennant wrote:
>>
>> As requested, numbers from WorldCat, the 1 May 2013 Research snapshot,
>> with 296,589,450 records:
>>
>> NO. of Recs ISBNs Percent
>>
>> 230402772 0 77.68%
>> 58861390 2 19.85%
>> 4269211 4 1.44%
>> 1659221 1 0.56%
>> 515674 6 0.17%
>> 466645 3 0.16%
>> 151133 8 0.05%
>> 84572 5 0.03%
>> 51967 10 0.02%
>> 33372 12 0.01%
>>
>> Keep in mind that WorldCat, being the largest library union database in
>> the world, includes a great deal of material that pre-dates the
>> establishment of the ISBN.

--
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet