Cataloging & Classification Quarterly (CCQ) will establish and maintain its reputation as an authoritative source for informed reviews for resources about aspects of cataloging and classification, including conceptual, historical and practical studies, and cataloging tools. To this end, CCQ seeks reviews for all types of resources relating to these aspects of cataloging and classification, including books in any of a number of languages as well as pertinent electronic resources.
Reviews should include three sections, namely identification of the work(s) under review, the body of the review, and identification of the reviewer.
The identification of the work of the review should be presented in the following format: full title (italicized and in bold), author(s) and/or contributor(s), edition statement (if any), place of publication, publisher, date of publication of the edition in hand, pagination (including the pagination of preliminary pages, if any), ISBN, price, and a URL in the case of online resources. The following examples will be of use:
Why I Enjoy Cataloging: Essays from the Life of a Cataloging Couple, by John Doe and Jane Roe. 2d ed. Boston: Oldline Publishers, 2009. xxxix, 465 p. illus. ISBN 978-1-9999-9900-9. $35.00
Rules for Genre Cataloging, compiled by committees of the State Library of Nova Anglia, Nova Anglia Library Association, Film Catalogers Circle, and Artists United for Proper Cataloging. Greater Anglia: Nonnius Nullius Press, 1996. 120 p. ISBN 1-99988-22-6.
Streaming Guide to Cataloging with RDA: A Manual for Catalogers, by Jane Smith. Version 1.0. Los Angeles: Cataloging Press, 2012. ISBN 978-2-4444-2222-2. http://www.catalogingpress.edu/rda/smith
The body of the review should provide the reader not only with a neutral and objective description of the content of the work, but also the reviewer's reaction to the adequacy of treatment or utility of the tool. Additionally, insofar as possible, the reviewer should place the item being reviewed in the existing literature. Doing so may involve comparing the resource under review with other treatments of the subject. If possible and appropriate, the reviewer should note the significance of the item. If the accuracy of particular statements in a book is to be questioned, the reviewer should provide specific examples.
The body of the review should contain between 400 and 1,400 words.
The reviewer's name and institutional affiliation should be the last three lines of the review, flush right.
After you have contacted CCQ's Book Review Editor to indicate your willingness to review a given book, you should receive it shortly. Please submit the review within two (2) months after receipt of the publication. Contact the Book Review Editor if you do not receive the book within three weeks.
CCQ receives all manuscript and book review submissions electronically via the ScholarOne Manuscripts website located at:. ScholarOne Manuscripts allows for rapid submission of original and revised manuscripts, and facilitates the review process and internal communication between authors, editors, and reviewers via its web-based platform. ScholarOne Manuscripts technical support can be accessed via . If you have any other requests please contact the journal's Book Review Editor, Luiz Mendes, at email@example.com.
For information on Taylor & Francis' position on Copyright and Author Rights for authors contributing to Routledge's U.S.-published Library and Information Science journals, please visit.