MARBI (Machine-Readable Bibliographic Information Committee) will be
considering five discussion papers and eight proposals during its
sessions at the American Library Association conference in San
Francisco, June 16-18. Full texts of the papers are available at
http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2001.
The issues discussed at MARBI sessions affect to a greater or lesser
extent everyone who catalogs or uses a catalog. But several of the
papers might have special implications for art librarians. I have
summarized these papers, and added a couple of questions. Please post
your comments on the list, or, if you prefer, send them directly to me.
DISCUSSION PAPER 2001-DP04
Expanding Field 046 for Other Dates in the MARC 21 Bibliographic and
Community Information Formats
Those who attended the session on documenting exhibitions at the ARLIS
conference in Los Angeles will find this paper particularly interesting.
The paper explores whether some types of dates which are not
accommodated in the MARC 21 formats are important for bibliographic
description and if so, it examines using field 046 (Special coded dates)
to record this information.
This paper grows out of a paper presented last year which discussed
dates within the context of electronic resources, and identified several
important date types: creation date, modification date, and date for
which a resource is valid (e.g. a website that contains train schedules
which are valid only within a particular time period). Participants in
the previous discussion felt that these types of dates may also be
applicable to most other types of resources, such as loose-leaf
materials, and thus, adding them to the formats may be beneficial for
both resource management and information retrieval purposes.
QUESTION:
Exhibition dates seem to be an obvious application, whether the catalog
record represents a record for an exhibition publication or a record for
an exhibition. Are there other special types of date that this field
could be used for?
PROPOSAL 2001-04
NAME: Making Field 260 Repeatable in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format
We all deal with resources that change over time, such as multipart
monographs, serials, and integrating resources (e.g. databases, Web
sites, and updating loose-leafs). This paper proposes that Field 260
"Publication, Distribution, etc. (Imprint)" be made repeatable to
accommodate both current and historical publishing information and to
provide better access to this information for database managers and
library system users.
The publishing statement is particularly important for resources that
change over time. The earliest place and publisher is important both for
resource identification and for record identification because other data
in records for continuing resources (including the title) are subject to
change. The presence of stable data is critical for machine matching,
duplicate detection, and union listing in shared catalogs. However, the
current place and publisher are important to acquisitions librarians for
ordering and claiming serials and to reference librarians dealing with
citations to current articles. At present, current place and publisher
for serials and multiparts are provided only in unstructured notes,
making display and retrieval of current publishing information
problematic at best.
QUESTIONS:
1. How do you feel about allowing the 260 field to be repeated for
continuing resources?
2. Are there other types of material that would benefit from
repeatability of field 260? The paper specifically excludes multiple
260's for multiple versions of a work published by different publishers.
However, composite art works and composite manuscripts may be examples
of material where it would be helpful to distinguish between two
different dates of creation, or two different places of execution (if
the cataloger is applying cataloging rules other than AACR2, and
including this information in the 260 field).
PROPOSAL 2001-11
Definition of Field 887 (Non-MARC Information Field) in the MARC 21
Bibliographic Format
Anyone who has experimented with moving metadata from one scheme to
another very quickly discovers that crosswalks can only go so far; there
are always some "leftovers" that may have meaning for one type of
application while not being important enough in the other to warrant
creation of a distinct element. This paper proposes the addition of
field 887 for information that is not mappable to an existing MARC 21
field. The source of the information would be from some other metadata
scheme. The field is modeled after field 886 (Foreign MARC Information
Field).
PROPOSAL 2001-05
Changes in MARC 21 to Accommodate Seriality
The committee continues to work on changes to MARC 21 based on revisions
to the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd ed. Rev. concerning
seriality. This paper includes four separate proposals: 2001-05/1:
Leader/07 Bibliographic level code for integrating resource; 2001-05/2:
008/18 and 006/01 Frequency code for continuously updated resources; 3)
2001-05/3: New codes for updating loose-leaf, database, and updating Web
site in 008/21 and 006/04 Type of serial; and 4) 2001-05/4: New code in
008/34 and 006/17 Successive/Latest entry indicator for latest entry
(integrating resource).
PROPOSAL 2001-09
Mapping of EACC characters to Unicode/UCS
Of interest to those who work with CJK. The paper proposes a mapping of
characters from the MARC East Asian Character Set (EACC) to Unicode/UCS,
the new standard.
--
Elizabeth O'Keefe
Director of Collection Information Systems
The Pierpont Morgan Library
29 East 36th Street
New York, NY 10016-3403
TEL: 212 590-0380
FAX: 212 685-4740
NET: [log in to unmask]
__________________________________________________________________
Mail submissions to [log in to unmask]
Administrative matters (file requests, subscription requests, etc)
to [log in to unmask]
ARLIS-L Archives and subscription maintenance:
http://lsv.uky.edu/archives/arlis-l.html
Questions may be addressed to list owner (Kerri Scannell) at: [log in to unmask]
|