Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Jaelus, post: 3144720, member: 46237&quot;]I suppose the point of my question is whether or not mules should ever be designated as <i>types</i>.</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;ve been working on a type set, and also authoring a catalog, and so I&#039;ve come across this issue and have been mulling around with different ways of approaching it. To me, a mule is always <i>also either a variety or an error</i>.</p><p><br /></p><p>Many catalogs approach <i>some</i> mules as types. That just doesn&#039;t sit well with me, partially because of the inconsistency with some mules being elevated to types somewhat arbitrarily with other mules being ignored. To me, a type is where the <i>design</i> of the coin was changed deliberately (even if it&#039;s a very minor change). With a mule, there is no design change. Two dies with their intended designs are just paired differently. If it&#039;s by accident (especially if quickly caught) that is an error, and if it is intentional (or through prolonged indifference) it is a variety.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in