Modeling history. (OCLC #988928518)

Sometimes I receive oddly-shaped materials for cataloging, such as this book with uncut pages (on the bottom) that are intended to stay uncut. Only the outsides are numbered, and the resulting “pocket” in many cases holds loose photos/cards. I was able to find copy (thank you EYM), so didn’t have to wonder about this one very long.

The physical description is done as:

300  __ ǂa 63 pages : ǂb illustrations (some color) ; ǂc 29 cm
    + ǂe 16 cards.

This is correct, as 63 is the last numbered page in the volume. While it is thicker than the average 63-page book, using this number is not “misleading” in a RDA sense; it correctly describes the number of pages with content, and similar standards are followed for traditional Japanese books with double leaves.

They did include a concise note to explain the weirdness:

500 __ ǂa Pages uncut at bottom, with cards inserted between
    pages in photography section.

Convertibility of space and defense resources to civilian needs : a search for new employment potentials / compiled for the Subcommittee on Employment and Manpower of the Committee on Labor and Public Welare, United States Senate. (OCLC #28090162)

This resource is the second volume of a set that is continuously paged. RDA on Pages, Etc., Numbered as Part of a Larger Sequence says to. record the first and last numbers of the pages, as in:

pages 587-1106

This volume also has pre-pages numbered with Roman numerals. If it had only those pages, the extent would be recorded:

vii pages

but I don’t see an example for combining these two forms. It seems reasonable to do:

vii pages, pages 587-1106

but the cataloger who made this copy chose the format:

vii, pages 587-1106

which is also clear.


Digital architecture / author, Dimitris Kottas. (OCLC #872755012)

RDA on individually paged volumes (as opposed to a continuous pagination over multiple volumes) says to record the number of volumes (units) but omit the pagination (subunits). For this set, extent would be:

2 volumes

There is an optional addition which allows specifying the pagination:

2 volumes (277, 263 pages)

The LC-PCC PS says in general not to apply the addition, but the NLA PS says to generally apply it. The copy for this set in OCLC is from National Library of Australia (Symbol AU@) which problably explain why it has been included in the copy!


A road to change : Harlan County / by Kim Childers. (OCLC #879573322)

This book has slightly odd pagination: the blank page before the title page is marked “Page 1”, the title page is marked “Page 3” and no other pages have numbers. I considered this a change in the form of numbering, so ignored those first few numbered pages by RDA, recording the extent as:

1 volume (unpaged)

There is a DVD by this same company with similar content, based on the same research, and considered complementary. I recorded this as:

787 08 ǂi Complemented by (work): ǂa Harlan County : a road to change.

with the exact relationship described in a note.


Cap-Martin : architecture beside the sea / Nerte Fustier-Dautier ; illustrations by Andre-Yves Dautier ; translated from the French by Julian Hale. (OCLC #875284539)

This book’s pages are numbered up through page 51 (which ends a chapter), and then there are five unnumbered pages which still have some content (notes, bibliography, series information).

RDA says to record the last numbered page, leaf, or column in each sequence, and RDA says that when there are both numbered and unnumbered sequences, disregard the unnumbered sequences unless they are referred to in a note. As the unnumbered pages would be referred to by the bibliography note, I recorded the pagination as:

    51 pages, 5 unnumbered pages

The bibliography spans the first two unnumbered pages, so how does that go in the 504? Like one of these?

    504 __ ǂa Includes bibliographical references (First and second
             unnumbered pages).
    504 __ ǂa Includes bibliographical references (Pages 1 and 2 of
             unnumbered sequence).

Gross! (AACR2 was tidier for this case.) I checked the table of contents and found that it numbered pages up through 55, so I chose to view these pages as “numbered”, just without page numbers printed on them. I recorded the pagination as:

    56 pages

did the bibiliography note as:

    504 __ ǂa Includes bibliographical references (pages 52-53).

and included an explanatory note about the pagination.


RDA Tip of the Week: Words and letters as pagination

In an RDA record, when page numbers are spelled out in words, record the pagination using the numeric equivalent. For example, if the page numbers go from “four” to “eighty-two”, record the extent as:

    82 pages

There are no brackets in this field! Extent of text (RDA 3.4.5) is recorded, not transcribed, so it contains the number of pages with no indication that it is spelled out (though you can mention it a note if it seems important).

A sequence of letters is different from spelled out numbers, though; if pages are numbered with letters (like A-R), record that range of letters:

    A-R pages

This is also different from pre-pages with Roman numerals. For example, for a book that is numbered in two sequences i-xi, 1-299, record the extent:

    xi, 299 pages

If those Roman numerals are just part of the main sequence (i-ix, 10-299), ignore the that the form of numbering has changed:

    299 pages

Memoria de Mario : a deshoras y siempre con Mario Benedetti / Juan Cruz Ruiz. (OCLC #862740886)

This piece has an elastic band around it because it’s not actually bound; it’s just a stack of papers, each folded in half. The current (AACR2) record has the extent as

84 loose folded p. : ǂb ill.

though that should probably be an [84]. The (backs of the) pages are numbered in Spanish words: cuatro, seis, … ochenta y dos (so maybe even [82]).

RDA says to record pages that are numbered in words using their numeric equivalent, so that would be:

82 pages

I would probably mention the loose/folded aspect in a note; some libraries may bind the piece, so it doesn’t seem like an essential descriptor, unless one is doing rare book cataloging. RDA’s “volume (loose leaf)” term appears to be more for updating loose-leaf volumes.