Error during command authentication.
Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=10061, phase=CONNECT, target=127.0.0.1:2306). The server is probably not started.
The MARBI papers that will be discussed at ALA Midwinter are
posted on the MARBI site, at:
Several of them seemed of interest to the art or special
collections world.
Proposal
2004-03: Designating the Privacy of Fields 541,
561 and 583 in the MARC 21 Bibliographic and Holdings Formats. Discusses a
proposal to RLG which would allow libraries to code these fields as private when
desired.
Is anyone concerned with private information in the Source of Acquisition
field (541), Ownership or Custodial History field (561) or Action Note
(583)? Is your concern about exporting these records to a bibliographic
utility, or within your OPAC's, or both?
Proposal 2004-02: Defining New Field Link Type Codes for
Subfield $8 (Field link and sequence number) in the MARC 21 Bibliographic and
Holdings Formats. This talks about these same fields, although in a slightly
different context (linking info in the 583 to the 541 and 561). If you use any of these fields, you might be interested.
Proposal 2004-01: Making Subfields $e, $f, and $g
Repeatable in Field 260 of the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format. The existence of
multiple manufacturers seems to be a problem mainly for rare book catalogers,
since they stress the importance of accurate transcription from the item
cataloged. Does anyone who catalogs prints encounter multiple manufacturing
statements? If so, I'd appreciate some examples.
Proposal 2004-04: Definition of Field 258 (Philatelic
Issue Data) in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format. Although this relates very
narrowly to philatelic data, are there implications for art works or art-related
material? Currently, the place of creation for an art work is relegated to a 500
note (because, as a non-published item, it isn't defined for the
260, Publication field).
Discussion Paper 2004-DP02: Applying Field 752 (Added Entry –
Hierarchical Place Name) for different purposes in the MARC 21 Bibliographic
Format.This paper discusses the role of the field, whether it would be
worth distinguishing between 752's that focus on subject coverage and 752's that
focus on place of production, and different ways to index it. How are ARLIS
members using this field (if at all?) It is used heavily at the Pierpont Morgan
to bring together in one field place of writing (245$b for a letter), place of
publication (260$a for a book), place of manufacture (260$e for a book),
place of binding for non-trade bindings (563), place of creation (500, for art
work). Any other aspects of place that people use this field for?
I welcome any and all thoughts on these matters.
Liz O'Keefe
Chair, Cataloging Advisory Committee
Elizabeth O'Keefe
Director of Collection Information Systems
The
Pierpont Morgan Library
29 East 36th Street
New York, NY
10016-3403
__________________________________________________________________
Mail submissions to