 |
 |
On Sep 24, 2004, at 10:38 AM, Karen Coyle wrote: > Bruce, if you keep thinking like this you're going to turn into a > cataloger -- you might not want that. :-) > A series is a serial, so if you do a record for a series you code it as > a serial. An archival collection isn't "serial" in that sense it's a > finite unit. OK, and my point that series and collection could both thought of as belonging to a more abstract class of relatedItem? It just seems to me that "host" is appropriate here, but series is not (because that information should be captured within the relatedItem). Bruce