I agree, but would push a lttle harder for combined numbers rather than
skipped.  If I am expecting vol. 22, no. 1 for Jan, 2 for Feb, and
Mar/April is 3, I am left with a pattern expecting the wrong numbers for
the rest of the year (e.g. May #5, not 4).

And yes yes yes, thank you for asking!

Jeanette L. Skwor
Serials Dept., Cofrin Library
University of WI-Green Bay
2420 Nicolet Drive
Green Bay, WI  54311-7003

"Libraries will get you through times of no money better than money will
get you through times of no libraries."
                              Anne Herbert, The Whole Earth Catalog

-----Original Message-----
From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum
[mailto:SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU] On Behalf Of BLACK, STEVE
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 11:28 AM
To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: Re: [SERIALST] Standard practices re: vol. numbers for combined
issues or skipped issues?

First, thank you for asking! It's refreshing to have a publisher care
about our viewpoints on matters like this.

Second, the most important thing is to communicate in the published
issues exactly what you're doing, and to spell out what the change is
and how enumeration of future issues will be affected.

If numbers correspond to weeks of the year, my personal preference would
be to combine the numbers, e.g. 26/27, so that no.28 still corresponds
with the 28th week of the year. That's not a standard, but it would work
and make sense.

You will want to call it a combined issue rather than a skipped (or
omitted) issue if you go that route. If you do just skip a number, have
it say clearly in the issues before and after the skipped one what you
did.

Steve Black
Reference, Serials, and Instruction Librarian Neil Hellman Library The
College of Saint Rose
392 Western Ave.
Albany, NY 12203
(518) 458-5494
blacks@strose.edu

-----Original Message-----
From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum
[mailto:SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU] On Behalf Of Mari Keefe
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 12:21 PM
To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: [SERIALST] Standard practices re: vol. numbers for combined
issues or skipped issues?

Hello all-

I  hope this is not  a repeat request and that it is an appropriate
request. I did try to  search the archives.

This is an area outside my  expertise.

I have been  asked to find out if there are standard  practices for
numbering volumes that  serials engage in  in when issues are  combined
or skipped.

Right now we include a Vol. number , with No. X," where X corresponds to

the week of the year.

We'll be producing one combined issue this year, so we will effectively
be skipping an issue.  Is it standard practice to *not* skip a number,
even

though we're skipping an issue? How do other magazines that do double
issues during the year treat this?

Thank you,

Mari

Mari Keefe
Research Manager
Computerworld
mari_keefe@computerworld.com

Know an IT Leader? Is there someone you'd like to recommend for next
year's Premier 100 IT Leaders list? Nominate that person today at
http://www.computerworld.com/p100nominations08
****
Computerworld is seeking nominations for truly new and innovative
corporate or consumer technologies for our third annual Horizon Awards.
Click for more information:
http://survey.computerworld.com/surveys/horizon07/horizon07.htm
****
Computerworld is seeking to identify 40 innovative technology people to
watch, under the age of 40. Nominations information here:
http://survey.computerworld.com/surveys/40under40/40under40.htm
****
Want to be notified about  next year's Best Places to Work in IT
program?
Email me at  mari_keefe@computerworld.com I'll  put you  on my alerts
list!
****

Find information about all Computerworld's Editorial Research Projects
and Awards at http://www.computerworld.com/html/research