> Currently the series field is attached in the database to editions, we > should move it to the work, because all editions of a work should be > part of the same series.
That begs the question of what constitutes a series then. I see books labelled something like "Classic Reprint Series" because that one publisher decided to reprint a bunch of old books, according to their own criteria of what they thnk is classic. In this case, the series does only apply to the one edition, and not all of the editions of the work. Does that mean this series label gets demoted and we deem it not really a series? Sounds like a slippery-slope nightmare of judgement to me. Or is there a standard definition of series that I just don't know about, and everyone else knows that such a series is not really a series? Just based on my casual observations, it seems like the series should be available at the edition level. Perhaps like the title and subtitle, though, there could be a series entry for both the work and the edition. - Alan _______________________________________________ Ol-discuss mailing list Ol-discuss@archive.org http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to ol-discuss-unsubscr...@archive.org
