Dates in the Patricia Clarke Memorial Library

[Pulpmeister]

I usually include the first publication date of a book in the title bar when I upload. I formed the habit early on when adding books to Calibre.

I became conscious of the importance of first publication date when a teenager and I settled down to read King Solomon's Mines. There is a lot of narrative about preparing the expedition, and then they walk. Walk?? I was baffled. Hadn't they heard of jeeps or helicopters?

For the first time, I checked the date of the book. 1888! Ah, no wonder. Back to the book.

I think it is also helpful for other readers. Many books published in years gone by are, shall we say, ethnically insensitive. I dislike so-called "trigger warnings". I'm a grown-up now, and can cope with these things without calling for the smelling salts. Anybody reading public domain books ought to be inured by now anyway, but I think it helps.

[Dazrin]

Thank you, I think it is very helpful.

Personally, if it isn't available I will go find it regardless since I like to track publication dates with my reading. Having it quickly available is nice.

[patrickt]

I use the Library of Congress website to find original publication date.
https://catalog.loc.gov/vwebv/searchBrowse

[disconnected]

Originally Posted by patrickt

I use the Library of Congress website to find original publication date.
https://catalog.loc.gov/vwebv/searchBrowse

Thanks for the link. I like to add the original pub date to Calibre.

[gmw]

I like having the first-published dates visible/easily-available. It's one of those small facts that I like to know before I start. I get a bit peeved that so many new ebooks put copyright information at the back, because it's something I expect to see (and look for) as I'm starting to read a book.

So, Pulpmeister, I like the fact you've included the date in the Patricia Clarke Memorial Library postings.

However, I like it rather less when you have the date as part of the title inside the epub. The dc:date field (no qualifier) will achieve that on import into Calibre without corrupting the title field. (ETA: I guess we might argue that this should be the date you published this edition. If you do that then you might put the first published date in the description rather than the title.)

Just saying, and this in no way takes away from the huge vote of thanks for putting up the Carolyn Wells books recently! I'm looking forward to taking a look at these.

* Having the date is much less offensive than the practice by some publishers of putting chunks of blurb into the title. eg: "Xyz: the best book you'll ever read!" Now that is really annoying.

[dwig]

Originally Posted by gmw

I like having the first-published dates visible/easily-available. ...
However, I like it rather less when you have the date as part of the title inside the epub. The dc:date field (no qualifier) will achieve that on import into Calibre without corrupting the title field. ...[/SIZE]

I agree, with one exception.

I've encountered several books which have been published under the same title and by the same author but with substantially different contents. Some have been "novelizations" of a previously published serial version. Others have been updates to an earlier version, done for various reasons. With these, I prefer to have something appended to the internal title, a form of sub-title, that announces the variant (e.g. pub. date, "revised", "2nd Edition", ...).