Using the same bibliographic record for a new numbering sequence can cause
inventory control and shelving problems.  In the past, here at Northwestern,
arbitrary "new series" designations had sometimes been added in order to
keep successive runs in the same record; however, it calls for a lot of
creativity when the publisher then decides to start its OWN "new series"--
I recall occasionally running across a locally-assigned "new series 2" or
other such designation to try to fit together our series numbering and
the publisher's series numbering!

I would be reluctant to use dates instead of numbers in recording and
marking the volumes, unless the publication is VERY regular.  Recognizing
complete and incomplete runs can be difficult if the publication is irregular.
Of course, if the publisher is very capricious with numbering--as is the case
with several serials in our Africana and Special Collections departments--
dates may be the way to go.  (With some of these, I would actually prefer
to get rid of the problem by getting rid of the materials, but of course the
bibliographers tend to frown on that .... ;)    )

It would make serialists' lives easier if publishers would either (a) refrain
from changing the numbering or (b) realize that if a numbering change is
necessary then a title change would also be called for.  (If it's different
enough to start out as "v. 1, no. 1", isn't it different enough to have a
different title???)

Kevin M. Randall
Head, Serials Cataloging Section
Northwestern University Library