 |
 |
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: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/list-dp.html#2004 http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/list-p.html#2004 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 TEL: 212 590-0380 FAX: 212 685-4740 NET: [log in to unmask] Visit CORSAIR, the Library’s comprehensive collections catalog, now on the web at http://corsair.morganlibrary.org __________________________________________________________________ Mail submissions to [log in to unmask] For information about joining ARLIS/NA see: http://www.arlisna.org//membership.html Send 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]