Print

Print


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