[DCRM-L] 046 - Incorrect or BCE dates

[John Lancaster]

I've only recently become aware, as a result of conversations with Glenn
Patton of OCLC and Deborah Leslie of the Folger,  of the availability of
the 046 field for the recording (and in OCLC at least, indexing) of
incorrect dates of publication (e.g. the date on the piece is printed as
1599, but the work was actually published in 1610) and B.C.E. dates (as
well as other dates of perhaps less interest to this community).

 

Although the field has clearly been around for some time, I and others I
have been in touch with have been either unaware of it, or only dimly
aware, and in any case not using it.  Deborah has suggested that a note
about it might be of general interest.

 

OCLC's implementation is set out in Bibliographic Formats and Standards:

 

http://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/0xx/046.shtm

 

 

The full MARC 21 description can be seen here:
http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd046.html or, if you prefer the
concise form, here:
http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/concise/bd046.html

 

The original MARBI approval goes back more than 10 years:
http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/1998/98-07.html  The most recent
discussions of expansion were in 2002, with links backward:

 

http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-03.html

 

 

I'd be curious to know whether the field is indexed in local systems,
and if it's in general use.  I know I'll be using it from now on.

 

Thanks.

 

--

John Lancaster (jlancaster at amherst.edu)

P.O. Box 775

Williamsburg, MA 01096-0775

413-268-7679

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20090909/177b2867/attachment.htm