---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 22:19:28 -0400
From: Judith Hopkins <ulcjh@ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU>
Subject: Re: a question from a new journal publisher (Michael Borries)

I am not a serial cataloger (or a serialst in any form) but I would like
to register my preference.  On the whole I agree with Michael Borries
but believe that the inaugural issue SHOULD be numbered, if only to make
it easier to record in the checkin systems of those libraries that do
obtain a copy.     And also for ease of future citation.   As for what
that numbering should be, how about  v. 0, no.1?  Or is that against all
serials canons?   If not, then I vote for v.1, no.1 with a very clear
statement that this is the only issue for volume 1.   Or make it a
combined issue:  v. 0 (or v.1), issues 1-4 (assuming a quarterly
publication).  No-one will then be tempted to claim a non-existent
later issue.     The first regular volume should start with its own
volume numbering, either v.1, no.1 or v.2, no.2, depending on how the
inaugural issue was numbered.

*************************************************************************
Judith Hopkins                          Phone:  716 645-2796
Central Technical Services              FAX:    716 645-5955
University at Buffalo                   E-mail: ulcjh@acsu.buffalo.edu
Buffalo, NY  14260-2200             http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~ulcjh
        Listowner of AUTOCAT@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU
    (http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/units/cts/autocat)

    The views expressed are my own and not those of UB or its Libraries
*************************************************************************

On Wed, 3 Jun 1998, Michael Borries wrote:
>   You could publish
> the first issue as a "Premier issue" or "Inaugural issue" or whatever
> wording you choose, without numbering, and then begin with Vol. 1, no. 1.
> Or you could do as you suggest, Vol. 1, no. 1 for the first issue -- just
> make it very clear in that first issue that the next number will be vol.
> 2,
> no. 1, so libraries and others don't start claiming non-existant issues.
> For that matter, in the first regular issue, for the sake of catalogers,
> you may want to mention the first issue and it's numbering.  I know you
> don't plan to send any to libraries, but it would be appreciated by most
> of us if you sent one to Library of Congress for cataloging.  Actually,
> as I write this, I suspect my preference would be for an unnumbered
> inaugural issue, followed by numbered regular issues -- probably less
> confusing.
>
>
> >Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 15:53:32 -0400
> >From: Cathleen Tetro <Cathleen.Tetro@HARPERCOLLINS.COM>
> >Subject: a question from a new journal publisher
> >
> [snip]
> >
> >     My question is about the volume and number for this special,
> >     inaugural, giveaway issue. Can we call it Vol. 1 No. 1, and call 1999
> >     issues Vol. 2, No. 1,2,3, & 4? Or, does this special giveaway issue
> >     need a volume and issue number at all? Do we start Vol. 1 No. 1 with
> >     the first issue of 1999?
> >
> >     This is all very new to me, so I hope you can help with this question.
> >
> >     Thanks so much.
>