Email list hosting service & mailing list manager

Binding title-specific indexes (2 messages) Birdie MacLennan 18 Nov 1998 22:08 UTC

2 messages, 85 lines:

Date:         Wed, 18 Nov 1998 07:53:04 -0800
From:         Frederic Bloomquist <Frederic.Bloomquist@LLS.EDU>
Organization: Loyola Law School
Subject:      Binding and indices
Comments: To: lcorbett@ODU.EDU, SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU

Ms. Corbet:

It is difficult to bind these at the same time the entire issue is due
to be bound.  I find the matter however, fairly trivial.  If someone is
searching for a magazine/journal chances are great that he/she already
knows the pertinent cite. I imagine it fairly infrequent for a library
user, especially a school library user, to search for an index and scan
it for information. Of course, this probably does happen, more often
than I assume.

My theory is this.  Collect several issues of an index and at the end of
say four or five years, however long it takes for the pages to mandate a
legitimate binding, then rather than pam binding, actually bind them as
a separate issue.

Waiting for indices to arrive presents several formidable problems. A
binder might wait so long that an issue V. 1 #4 of a quarterly e.g.,
disappears from the shelf. One then either purchases a replacement issue
or a replacement volume both of which are fairly costly, especially
since the journal was paid for once already.

Second while the information is indeed pertinent, a table of contents
and quite often an index are included at the back of each individual
journal. These might not be as comprehensive or subject oriented as
cumulative indices, but again I think the import lies in binding an
entire volume as soon as the opportunity arises. Bound volumes, my
experience relates, are less likely to be "liberated".

As for collecting and moving table of contents to the front of a
completed volume while preparing it for the bindery, I don't.  Usually
binding companies charge more if you have made significant alterations
to the original individual issues. I've been told it is because once
something is removed from the book the company has no way of proving
they themselves didn't lose a page(s) and are reluctant to be held
responsible. They would rather you pay a higher binding cost so the
binding company can incorporate this practice into their overall binding

Tipping-in is time consuming and most libraries have neither the
implements nor the expertise to accurately, neatly bind them in the
back. Often times this can also degrade the overall quality of the
"professional" bind.

The proliferation and increased availability of information on-line or
in microfilm format also reduces the necessity of a hard copy,
cumulative table of contents.

Case by case however there are some issues that simply require one bind
any referential material with the volume and these should be bound at the
the back of the book when the entire volume is bound.

I wouldn't ignore them but the completed volume, in and of itself, 85%
of the times is the most important thing. Therefore to insure a complete
holdings, binding at the first opportunity in general should be the

I remain,

Frederic E. Bloomquist
Bindery Guy
William M. Rains Law Library
Loyola Law School
Los Angeles, CA

Date:         Wed, 18 Nov 1998 07:58:22 -0800
From:         Frederic Bloomquist <Frederic.Bloomquist@LLS.EDU>
Organization: Loyola Law School
Subject:      Re: Binding and indices

Additionally, as a rule, when binding a volume table of contents should
be bound in the front and indices in the back.

F.E. Bloomquist