Hello,

 

If it’s a title that gets bound, we always bind regardless of missing issues (after trying to obtain the issues first, of course).

 

We have two different ways of binding volumes with missing issues, so that users are alerted by what is printed on the spine and what is in the catalog. There are two different ways we do this:

 

-Binding “around the hole”: This is generally what we prefer to do. Essentially, you bind it as two units. So say vol.79, no.2 of a quarterly was missing, you would bind “Vol.79,no.1 2014” and Vol.79,no.3-4 2014”. This way, if the issue comes in, it can just be bound by itself. This also is preferable in that you can tell exactly what issues are missing from looking at the catalog.

 

-Binding incomplete: We tend to do this is we’re pretty positive we will not be receiving the missing issue(s), or if there are several issues missing throughout, like in your example with Life. In this scenario, the spine/catalog would simply say “Vol.79 inc. 2014” with inc. standing for incomplete.

 

It’s generally a judgement call on the part of the binder whether to bind around the hole or incomplete, and can be a bit tricky to decide when you first start doing it.

 

Thanks,

 

Rachel M. Smith

Serials Procurement and Access Specialist

Indiana University Libraries

Technical Services / Serials Acquisitions

1320 E. 10^th St.

Bloomington, IN 47405

Tel: (812)855-7652

Smith267@indiana.edu

 

 

From: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum [mailto:SERIALST@LISTSERV.NASIG.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Skoog
Sent: Monday, April 04, 2016 10:32 AM
To: SERIALST@LISTSERV.NASIG.ORG
Subject: [SERIALST] Binding volumes with missing issues

 

 

To unsubscribe from the SERIALST list, click the following link:
http://listserv.nasig.org/scripts/wa-NASIG.exe?SUBED1=SERIALST&A=1