Terms such as "full" or "partial" facsimile cannot make sense due to the definition of facsimile = "make it similar" and should therefore not be used.
If, for example, one wanted to understand by a full facsimile that the original has been reproduced as closely as possible to the original in all aspects, such as in extent, size, materiality, binding design, binding, colors, finishes, details (missing parts, stitching, etc.), etc., then there is not a single full facsimile among all the facsimile editions ever published.
In other words, if there were a universal definition of a full facsimile, every facsimile published so far would be a partial facsimile and vice versa. This is because every facsimile is subjected to some compromise in one or more of the above criteria (e.g., material and/or design of the binding, signs of use and age, number of pages reproduced, color reproduction, binding, etc.). Thus, it is also not possible to define in a generally valid manner what is meant by the term "partial facsimile" (which and how many criteria would not have to be met, and to what degree, in order to no longer be considered a "full facsimile"?), which is why these terms are practically not used in expert circles.