---------------------------- Text of forwarded message -----------------------
Date:         Fri, 20 Mar 1992 07:45:58 -0500
From:         Donald J Morton PhD <dmorton@UMASSMED.UMMED.EDU>
Subject:      binding methods

NOTCHED BINDING FAILURES:

We went through the same thing with binders about 10-15 years ago
with our binders.  They didn't want to oversew everything and
wanted to either cleat sew - which is evidently the same as notched
binding - or use a fantastic new glue from Germany that would hold
the pages in no matter what.  As a result, even though our
specifications have always stressed oversewing, they
surreptitiously would use the other methods until we'd catch them
because they said it was too much work for their staffs to do the
oversewing.  Just last week we had to send one of these volumes to
our present binder, who's very good about oversewing everything, to
rebind it because the pages were simply falling out of it.

Oversewing is obviously better because it sews the signatures or
however the pages are arranged together so it's virtually
impossible for them to separate and fall out.  The disadvantage is
that there is less margin remaining because the stitching takes
up some space.  However, we can almost always see all of the print
and, in that case, can then get it photocopied although some effort
is sometimes required when print goes right to the sewing.  We also
don't bind any volumes larger than 1200 pages, less when pages are
unusually large, which in turn makes it easier to handle the
volumes for copying.

So I would suggest insisting on oversewing for everything and
to change binders, if necessary.  We have to send our binding
contract out for bids and we stress oversewing in it.  We send out
about 23,000 or so photocopied articles/year, plus there are
countless thousands more run off by our clientele on our inhouse
photocopiers, so our volumes suffer from the same type of abuse as
yours.