Re: Not really a new edition?

Posting to Autocat

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 3:59 PM, McCormick, Elizabeth wrote:

<snip>
I have here The invisible hands : top hedge fund traders on bubbles, crashes, and real money by Steven Drobny. It was published in “(c) 2010, 2011” by Wiley. This is a paperback book. In WorldCat, there is a bib (#468969450) for the hardcover, which was published in 2010 by Wiley. Both books have a foreword by Jared Diamond; however, in the paperback, it’s called “Foreword to the Previous Edition.” The paperback has a new foreword by Nouriel Roubini as well as a new preface by the author in addition to the “Preface to the Previous Edition.” Through the magic of the Interwebs, I’ve been able to compare the tables of contents for both books and they match exactly except for the aforementioned differences. Is this really enough to warrant a new bib – a new foreword and a new preface?
</snip>

In addition to what everyone has mentioned, there are four main resources:

1) LCRI 1.0 https://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/aacr2-chapter-1/1-0–decisions-before-cataloging—rev#TOC-Edition-or-Copy-of-Monograph

2) ALA’s “Differences Between, Changes Within: Guidelines on When to Create a New Record” http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/alcts/resources/org/cat/differences07.pdf

3) OCLC’s “When to Input a New Record” http://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/input/ and the “Field-by-Field Guidelines for New Records” http://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/input/#CHDJFJHA

4) IFLA’s ISBD http://www.ifla.org/files/cataloguing/isbd/isbd-cons_2007-en.pdf#page=12

Following these guidelines (which unfortunately are not all the same) can turn it into an almost automatic decision. A big concern is whether there is a change in the 245$abc and/or in the 300$a. If there are no differences but you still know there are major changes, then it is a matter of judgement, but if you know there are differences in the persons responsible for the text, you should at least describe them in a 500 note. I would think that an additional preface would be shown in a difference in the 245$c and in the 300$a, thereby making it clearly a new edition.

For rare books, there is more attention paid to different *states* of the text than with more normal publications. States of the text rarely show up in what is recorded in the normal bibliographic fields. This can become especially detailed when it comes to dealer’s catalogs, which can be exceedingly minute in their descriptions.

In the future, when almost everything is online and will be liable to various types of computer parsing, I think the emphasis will change toward much more exact methods using word counts and file compares instead of our rather primitive methods of counting pages and relying on the wording and dates found on the chief sources of information, which is all supplied by the publishers/printers and almost never by the authors.

This was one of those areas that I hoped RDA would address but, they didn’t.

-161

Share