Hi all,

We use summary level info (volume and year) on our bound periodicals,
and we add INC or INCOMPLETE to indicate we are missing content in the
bound volume (typically an issue or issues).  Pretty much standard
practice when binding periodicals.

We have discovered that our music department, which handles the binding
of the music periodicals, has a slightly different interpretation of
incomplete.

We came across a bound volume with the following on the spine:

            90-96

            1987-88

            INCOMPLETE

When we looked to see what was missing, we couldn't find it.  The bound
volume contained issues 90-96.  The library does not own issue 97, which
falls in 1988.  They only thing we could figure out was that they were
trying to indicate that the year 1988 is incomplete.  We did some
checking and have found numerous examples of this in the music
periodicals.

We find this quite confusing as we have always worked on the assumption
that the incomplete label applies to the primary designation (the
enumeration in this case).  They are trying to indicate that the year
1988 is incomplete, but we are concerned that folks are reading the
label as meaning there is something incomplete about 90-96.

Does anyone else do something like this?  The music periodicals are in a
separate collection, but I would like to achieve some measure of
consistency for our users.  However, I would feel more comfortable
letting this practice continue if others out there are doing something
similar.

Thanks.

Buddy Pennington

Serial Acquisitions Librarian

University of Missouri - Kansas City

University Libraries

www.umkc.edu/lib