Another spectrum of serial cataloging philosophy is not between
rigid and loose, but between completeness and consistency.  Either
the cataloging is complete OR consistent, but it can never be both
at the same time.  Let me explain.

    I've looked at serial cataloging (and serials in general) from a
perspective loosely based on the maxim of the Austrian
mathematician/logician Kurt Godel.  In 1931, he developed a
mathematical proof to show that any system is either complete or
consistent, but never both at the same time.  For example, Aristole's
philosophy and Euclid's geometry are both very internally consistent
systems, but incomplete in explaining all cases.  The American legal
system and the Library of Congress subject headings strive to be
complete systems and take in all possibilities, with the resulting
completeness generating many inconsistencies.  If you make a
"consistent" rule for every case, you'll end up with either an
incomplete rule, or some inconsistency.  (I think any system based on
the human experience comes out this way.)

    The LCRI's juxtaposed with everyday serial cataloging experience
push most of us towards "the middle."  We're mostly consistent, but
not always, because we also have to be complete and deal with all
serials, especially the inconsistent ones.  I think there are
applications of this in almost all serial areas.

    Incidentally, Mr. Godel developed his mathematical ideas in the
days before computers, and went partially insane for a while trying to
work through some further ideas after the one stated above.  I think
too rigid or too loose of a serial cataloging style may lead to
similar results. ;)

G. LeGrande Fletcher
Catalog Paraprofessional           Voice: (801) 378-7552
Brigham Young University           Fax:   (801) 378-3221
Provo, UT                          Email: legrande_fletcher@byu.edu