As a non-librarian, but a cataloguer of many thousands of rare books for over 25 years, I use the current printed and on-line catalogues on a daily basis, and regularly submit corrections and notes to the ESTC database.

I agree that the existing convention 'B' is the more compact and feel no need for the rather cumbersome 'A', which adds nothing but line length to the existing descriptions.

I would note however that a more detailed explanation of the page content would be invaluable. In many cases books can be bound out of sequence, with sections bound in variant orders, and neither A or B help with this. Is the unnumbered page a blank, a colophon, an advert leaf ? I would also make a plea for a 'plate' collation to be included, not just the general catch all of 'plates' or 'illustrations'.

sincerely

Tony Fothergill

Ken Spelman Rare Books ABA