I think volumes as editions is the right approach the majority of the time given the current constraints, but for the example that was mentioned earlier where the volumes have different authors or perhaps for works which are published over a long period of time (e.g. Jesuit Relations), I could potentially see cataloging them as works in a series. Both approaches are slightly artificial and have their drawbacks.
Due to the vagaries of IA/OL in particular, the 9 volumes in 11 parts portion of things gets a little hair in that you'll need 11 edition records if you want to be able to link separately to 11 different IA scans. Tom On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Hi-storian <[email protected]> wrote: > Laurent -- > > Thanks! After giving it more consideration, I agree with the volume as > Editions approach. Thanks for the Edition name suggestion, that sounds > like a workable work-around. > > I agree that adding a volume field to the Edition record would be a good > long-term solution, rather than more complex proposals. This could be a > field included in the user-selectable sort order that I suggested in > regards to translations. > > Thanks again for your helpful suggestions. > > -- Hi-storian > > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Laurent Brun" <[email protected]> > *To: *"Open Library -- technical discussion" <[email protected]> > *Sent: *Monday, February 22, 2016 12:16:17 PM > > *Subject: *Re: [ol-tech] Fwd: How to handle Volumes within an Edition?? > > Personally, given how Openlibrary has been coded, I find it more > logical and practical to treat each volume of a multi-volume book as a > separate "edition", for example: > > https://openlibrary.org/works/OL15706213W/Ovide_moralis%C3%A9 > > > https://openlibrary.org/works/OL6847382W/Alexandre_le_Grand_dans_la_litt%C3%A9rature_fran%C3%A7aise_du_moyen_%C3%A2ge > > In such cases, I enter the volume number in the "edition-edition_name" > field (a.k.a. "Does this edition have a specific name?"). > > Of course, if you have several editions of a multi-volume book, that > would mean something like "2nd ed., vol. 1", "2nd ed., vol 2" etc. in > the "edition-name" field. > > However, if the OL developers could just add a "volume" field to > editions, that would probably be a more elegant solution without being > too time-consuming for them... > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Hi-storian <[email protected]> > wrote: > > My situation involves a single work with 9 volumes, bound as 11. Each of > > the volumes has different subtitles, different authors, and printed in > > different years. Some of the volumes have Tables of Contents that > should be > > included in the record, so that's not available as a work-around. > > > > I'm well acquainted with standard library practice and have never been > fond > > of it. It may be adequate for some works, but terribly useless for other > > works. Just because past practice dealt with it poorly need not limit > us in > > future practice. Standard practice never included book covers or Tables > of > > Contents, but these are valuable additions. > > > > I understand the current database structure doesn't deal with this > real-life > > issue, and changes to the database are a long-range planning thing. In > the > > interim, what are your thoughts on volumes as Works or as Editions?? > > > > ________________________________ > > From: "Karen Coyle" <[email protected]> > > To: "Open Library -- technical discussion" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2016 2:29:04 PM > > Subject: Re: [ol-tech] Fwd: How to handle Volumes within an Edition?? > > > > Standard library practices for monographs in multiple volumes is to > > simply give a volume statement, like "2v.", in the place of the > > pagination. That's all that is needed. If, however, the volumes have > > been scanned, then, as Tom mentions, for scanned works, there is a > > separate IA entry for each volume, since each volume is a separate > > scanned file. > > > > One possible solution is to use the table of contents area. Since > > Markdown is being used for editing, a full URI is coded as actionable. > > So if you put: > > > > * Volume 1 | http://archive.org/details/..... > > * Volume 2 | http://archive.org/details/..... > > > > It should create clickable links to each scanned volume. > > > > kc > > > > On 2/20/16 8:45 AM, Tom Morris wrote: > >> There isn't really a good solution to this currently. OpenLibrary is > >> kind of caught between existing library cataloging practice only > >> catalogs editions, not works, and keeps all volumes together on a single > >> edition record; and the needs of Internet Archive to have individual > >> volumes recorded so that they match up with the scanning. > >> > >> Supporting multi-volume editions would require additional engineering > >> work as well as a change in current practices. > >> > >> It's worth noting that a similar situation exists currently with > >> translations. Translated editions are all collected together in the same > >> work with original language editions. This is, I believe, the correct > >> way to do it, but because there's no easy way to filter by language, the > >> pile of editions can be quite a jumble for popular works. > >> > >> Tom > >> > >> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Hi-storian <[email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> > >> See my email, below for details. > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> *From: *"Open Library Support" <[email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]>> > >> *To: *[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >> *Sent: *Thursday, February 18, 2016 12:15:00 PM > >> *Subject: *Re: Support case *Other* > >> > >> > >> > >> Hi and thank you for contacting us, > >> > >> Yep, there is no non-mess way to do this at this time and I'm > actually > >> not even sure if there's a standard way to do it for the way our > >> records > >> are currently imported. You're welcome to asdk on the ol-tech list > to > >> see if someone there has a little more insight into the meta-aspects > >> than I do. Details are on this page (the archives link is wrong but > >> otherwise the page is accurate) > >> > >> https://openlibrary.org/community > >> > >> Thanks for using openlibrary.org <http://openlibrary.org> and > >> archive.org <http://archive.org> > >> > >> The Open Library Team/jw > >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >> > >> On 2/18/16 11:54 AM, [email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > Description: > >> > > >> > I understand the nature and relation between Work records and > >> Editions records, but I have a question that doesn't seem to be > >> answered in your FAQ anywhere. > >> > > >> > How do you enter an Edition that contains multiple volumes. In > >> theory, you should be able to create multiple volume records under > >> the Edition record, just as you create multiple Edition records > >> under a Work record. > >> > > >> > I'm assuming the work around is to enter each separate volume as > >> a new "Edition" ... but that's not quite right. It would create a > >> mess that would quickly be confusing. After all, the 1st Edition > >> may have 2 volumes, the 2nd Edition 4 volumes, the 3rd edition 6 > >> volumes .... Imagine how confusing if the volumes are all jumbled up > >> without being clearly set together within an Edition. > >> > > >> > Is there a way to do this correctly, of is this a feature "in the > >> works" for a later release? What should I do in the meantime so > >> records don't have to be re-entered? > >> > > >> > Thanks! Hi-storian > >> > > >> > A new support case has been filed by Hi-storian > >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>. > >> > > >> > Topic: Other > >> > URL: https://openlibrary.org > >> > User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:44.0) Gecko/20100101 > >> Firefox/44.0 > >> > OL-username: Hi-storian > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Ol-tech mailing list > >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >> http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech > >> Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to > >> [email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Ol-tech mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech > >> Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to > >> [email protected] > >> > > > > -- > > Karen Coyle > > [email protected] http://kcoyle.net > > m: 1-510-435-8234 > > skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600 > > _______________________________________________ > > Ol-tech mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech > > Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to > > [email protected] > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ol-tech mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech > > Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to > > [email protected] > _______________________________________________ > Ol-tech mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech > Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to > [email protected] > > > _______________________________________________ > Ol-tech mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech > Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to > [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ Ol-tech mailing list [email protected] http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to [email protected]
