Multi references for the same page

Hello,

For some references like Cal# or Lec# the reference is not valid for the type but for the individual years ending with strange situation where we have the reference of the first coin on page level.

This workaround is obviously wrong but there is no better way now to indicate the reference.
The worst consequence is for the advance search based on catalogue number let's take Cal#61 on this page and here the result...

So my solution will be to have a Tick box in front of each reference to define if it's a multiple reference or not:



By doing so we can setup the search engine to give result for all the numbers between Cal#49 and Cal#69 in the example I gave at first.

How does that Cal# reference even work? How can multiple different types within the same currency all have the same Cal# reference number, for instance three types all with that Cal# 61?
- https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces3155.html
- https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces5581.html
- https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces781.html

Looks like they reuse the numbers for every value ... (0.5 ptas, 1 ptas, 5 ptas, ... each have a Cal#61)

edit: apparently not correct, thanks for the clarification

Hello,
Calico resets the numbering for each ruler (or republican period). So for Alfonso XIII for example, they start at #1 with the oldest and highest denomination minted in Madrid. Then they go through the coins by mint, denomination, and date, each date getting a new number

Verweis : "stratocaster"​Hello,
​Calico resets the numbering for each ruler (or republican period). So for Alfonso XIII for example, they start at #1 with the oldest and highest denomination minted in Madrid. Then they go through the coins by mint, denomination, and date, each date getting a new number
​

​It's the same for Lecompte...

Verweis : "Indomini16"​

Verweis : "stratocaster"​Hello,
​​Calico resets the numbering for each ruler (or republican period). So for Alfonso XIII for example, they start at #1 with the oldest and highest denomination minted in Madrid. Then they go through the coins by mint, denomination, and date, each date getting a new number
​​

​​It's the same for Lecompte...

​It is like KM# by country.
And Cal# changes all numbering with each new edition.

If a catalog changes the numbering each edition it shouldn't be used as a reference on Mistake.

Verweis : "Idolenz"​If a catalog changes the numbering each edition it shouldn't be used as a reference on Mistake.
​

​Not if the reference would include also the version of catalogue edition. So, if you have new updated version of catalogue of the same author, there is a clear need to include version of catalogue (version as number or year of issue of the catalogue) in references.

Who would want to add references for each edition, that is a completely another question...
LP

So, if you have new updated version of catalogue of the same author, there is a clear need to include version of catalogue (version as number or year of issue of the catalogue) in references.

That's the part that makes such a catalog quite useless in my eyes.
Why have like 10 different entries for the same reference, you would have to own each and every issue.

Verweis : "Idolenz"​So, if you have new updated version of catalogue of the same author, there is a clear need to include version of catalogue (version as number or year of issue of the catalogue) in references.
​
​That's the part that makes such a catalog quite useless in my eyes.
​Why have like 10 different entries for the same reference, you would have to own each and every issue.

​Hi
I agree totally where there are countless or better say never ending new versions. But in cases (if there are any) where you have couple of versions by single author and numbering is not the same between these issues, there would be prudent to have all issues included.
LP