OK, I'll confess to being a professional librarian... It is common to include the series number, e.g. "v. 17" after the title:
The Story of civilization, v. VII In the standard library record (MARC21), the title of the series and the number of the series are in separate subfields in the series field. That's for the convenience of linking the series title with other records with the same series title without the number making them a non-match. At the same time, it's also nice to be able to search for a particular number in a series. Since the OL series field is a single string, I think that putting the series title followed by a comma and the series number should suffice. If it should be desired to link the entries in a series, the fields could be parsed into series title and number. Meanwhile, the OL series fields will look comfortably close to how most people would cite a series and would understand it. kc Quoting Roger Loran Bailey <[email protected]>: > Well, there are standards and there are common usages. Most of us know, for > example, what standard English is, but very few people actually talk that > way. Standards of library cataloging are a bit more obscure though. If we > have a professional librarian here I suppose we can get an answer to what > the standard is. As for common usage, though, the most common catalog > entries that I see place the number of the book in a series with the name of > the series. In fact, examples of it being done differently do not come to > mind right now. That is why I suspect that to be the standard, but I cannot > be sure. The authorities who make up the standards can make up some pretty > obscure ones sometimes. As for myself, I would place the number with the > series title until someone who has the credentials says otherwise. > > > _ _ _ > > "Freedom is always and exclusively freedom for the one who thinks > differently." - Rosa Luxemburg > > > The Militant: > http://www.themilitant.com > Pathfinder Press: > http://www.pathfinderpress.com > Granma International: > http://www.granma.cu/ingles/index.html > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alan Millar" <[email protected]> > To: "Open Library -- general discussion" <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 4:11 PM > Subject: Re: [ol-discuss] Series titles: include individual ID or not? > > >> On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Roger Loran Bailey >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I think I would add the series number. There doesn't seem to be much >>> point >>> in identifying a book as being in a series if there is no indication of >>> which one in the series it is. >> >> Yes, certainly, we want the number identifying which one in the series it >> is. >> >> To expand or clarify, then, I guess my specific question is whether >> that should go in the series name field, or in another field such as >> the subtitle. >> >> I know data gets conflated when translated between different >> databases, but I don't know what is considered the standard or proper >> way of describing the series collective and individual data (if there >> is such a thing). >> >> Thanks for the feedback. >> >> - Alan >> _______________________________________________ >> Ol-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to >> [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > Ol-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to > [email protected] > -- Karen Coyle [email protected] http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet _______________________________________________ Ol-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to [email protected]
