the Library of Congress system mostly makes sense except when this happens

LC doesn’t care about book series so it basically just puts them in alphabetical order by title. everything that author has written has the same cutter number (in Snicket’s case, .S6795) and then the first couple of letters of the book’s title come next. so EVERYTHING by that author is all together, but completely out of sequential order. and I hate it.

Yuck! Not helpful to a patron browsing the shelf.

You could class the series together (and indicate that decision in the series authority record) and then give each title your chosen classification plus an enumeration like “v.1″ or “no.2″ or whatever is appropriate.

I’ve also been known to fudge cutter numbers when I want books to sit a certain way on the shelf; that’s easiest to do when you get the whole series at once.


What the Bible says about salvation / by Virgil Warren. (OCLC #9092454)

Often when copy cataloging, we’ll find a record with a call number ending with “x”. It’s my understanding that some institutions add this when constructing a call number as a way of marking it “locally assigned”, so that there is no conflict if another book comes in with that same call number. Our policy is to not add x’s when constructing call numbers, and to remove them from call numbers in incoming copy. That is, if a record comes in with:

    050 _4 ǂa BT751.2 ǂb .W294x

We add a new call number to the record and use it:

    050 _4 ǂa BT751.2 ǂb .W294x
    090 __ ǂa BT751.2 ǂb .W294 1982

(We also add the year if it is not there already.)

Note that ‘x’ is different from other small letters that might appear at the end of a call number, which have their own specific meanings, and should not be removed:

  • a – facsimile
  • b,c,d, etc. – other title with that same call number, probably even published in the same year
  • z – uncertain year of publication (1950z = 1950-1959)

Sometimes the ‘x’ will sneak in on copy, and that’s fine too. This shelving tutorial suggests that it should be treated as “½”.