[DCRM-L] subfields $3 and $5 to specify copies in MARC bib records

Thu Jan 14 11:04:55 MST 2016

Though "materials specified" ($3) is appealing, I agree with Francis that
it seems more appropriately applied to a volume, part, or other subunit of
a manifestation than to a copy of the manifestation. In the case of 563 for
bindings, though, it seems to me that the scope is not well-written. Even
without trying to use $3 for copy designations, it ought to be able to
contain volume numbers for separate binding descriptions when the volumes
in a set are not bound uniformly, and not only a portion of the
binding. For example:

563 $3 v.1 $a Publisher's blue cloth.
563 $3 v.2 $a Publisher's green cloth.

And these descriptions of parts, volumes, etc. may or may not be
copy-specific:

563 $3 v.1 $a Library copy rebound in library cloth. $5 DLC

So I also agree that some other means for specifying the copy (institution,
collection/location, call number, and/or identifier) would also be useful
alongside $3. That said, I have more often seen all of the above contained
right in $a with the rest of the note, and am not sure how it would be more
actionable it would be in $3 and/or another field unless it also record the
holding, part, copy, etc. using a parseable syntax and/or identifier for
rather than simply human readable strings.

Perhaps this could be accomplished by creating a syntax *within* $5.
Mimicking control subfields $6 and $8, this could be something like:

$5 [MARC institution code]/[sublocation code]:[call number]-[copy number]

Perhaps it would also help to make greater use of $8 to link such related
notes and access points together within descriptions.

Matt

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:17 AM, JOHN C ATTIG <jxa16 at psu.edu> wrote:

> Note that subfield $9 is reserved for local definition.  If you are
> proposing this as an addition to MARC, then you need to pick a different
> subfield.
>
> John Attig
> Penn State University
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From: *"Lapka, Francis" <francis.lapka at yale.edu>
> *To: *"DCRM Users' Group" <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
> *Sent: *Thursday, January 14, 2016 10:16:58 AM
>
> *Subject: *Re: [DCRM-L] subfields $3 and $5 to specify copies in
> MARC        bib        records
>
> I see the sense in that suggestion, too. Using a record control number
> would be the most explicit means possible to refer to a Holding entity (a
> copy). My concern with using $w is that this subfield may also serve as
> control number for the heading (e.g. the name or genre).
>
>
>
> I suppose I imagined a subfield that isn’t too prescriptive about the form
> of identifier used. It could be the control number for the Holding, or it
> could be the full call number (and there are other possibilities), e.g.:
>
>
>
> 700 1_ ‡a Lindley, John, ‡d 1799-1865, ‡e former owner. ‡5 CtY-BA ‡9
> BACRB G240 .H35 1589+
>
>
>
> Mind you, I’m not entirely sure that such an addition/modification to our
> MARC vocabulary is necessary or will make our next transition easier, but I
> think it merits consideration.
>
>
>
> Francis
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] *On
> Behalf Of *Deborah J. Leslie
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 13, 2016 11:56 AM
> *To:* DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [DCRM-L] subfields $3 and $5 to specify copies in MARC bib
> records
>
>
>
> What about dropping the "Bibliographic" from ‡w Bibliographic record
> control number, and authorize for a larger number of fields?
>
>
>
> https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/ecbdcntf.html
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.loc.gov_marc_bibliographic_ecbdcntf.html&d=AwMF-Q&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=t7GDkvcZa922K6iya7a6MxgVxxw7OjL0m1rPBXkflk4&m=6NsVdZEESTdegHN3eSmGrE_-3euko22dM4BsGgzY_UU&s=NN0KxyBFRDOHiYBQOHCUdXnjWUhJ9KYOtcMK8lNUFpU&e=>
>
>
>
> Deborah J. Leslie | Folger Shakespeare Library | djleslie at folger.edu |
> 202.675-0369 | 201 East Capitol St., SE, Washington, DC 20003 | www.
> folger.edu
>
>
>
> *From:* dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu
> <dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu>] *On Behalf Of *Lapka, Francis
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 13 January 2016 10:04
> *To:* dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu
> *Subject:* [DCRM-L] subfields $3 and $5 to specify copies in MARC bib
> records
>
>
>
> As we prepare for life After-MARC, I think it would be handy to have a
> clear means to associate copy-specific data in a bib record with the copy
> to which it applies, for example for data in fields 655 and 7xx. I’m
> concerned that MARC doesn’t currently provide an adequate means.
>
> MARC gives us subfield $5 to record the institution to which a field
> applies. But as defined, this field cannot specify a copy. See:
> http://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/echdcntf.html
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.loc.gov_marc_holdings_echdcntf.html&d=AwMF-Q&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=t7GDkvcZa922K6iya7a6MxgVxxw7OjL0m1rPBXkflk4&m=6NsVdZEESTdegHN3eSmGrE_-3euko22dM4BsGgzY_UU&s=7vI2pE8-BPpdWx_jtgd8KjAJJFJGHG5H5vHWQTPZa9o&e=>
>
> MARC gives us subfield $3 to record “the part of the described materials
> to which the field applies.” I have seen subfield $3 used to specify an
> individual copy – where there is more than one copy described in a bib
> record – but this seems an imperfect match to the scope of subfield $3. The
> flawed suitability of subfield $3 is made most clear in the wording used to
> define its scope within the 563 field, for bindings: “Portion of the
> binding that is described in the field.”
>
> This leaves me with little faith that subfield $3 can serve as a machine
> actionable means to match copy-specific data in a bib record with its
> related copy entity – for now, a Holdings record; someday, an Item entity –
> when subfield $3 may also be used to denote the portion of a manifestation
> to which data applies. I have doubts that it can effectively serve both
> functions.
>
> Should we explore a new subfield? Are there any left? Or modify $5 to
> include institution and copy identifier?
>
> Francis
>
>
>
> Francis Lapka  ·  Catalog Librarian
>
> Department of Rare Books and Manuscripts
>
> Yale Center for British Art
>
> 203.432.9672  ·  francis.lapka at yale.edu
>
>
>
> YALE CENTER FOR BRITISH ART REOPENS
>
> The Center will reopen
> <http://britishart.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/Exhibition%20Press%20Releases/Overview%20Press%20Release%281%29.pdf>
> on May 11, 2016.
>
>
>
> BUILDING CONSERVATION PROJECT
>
> The Center is currently closed for building conservation
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__bit.ly_1qAAcGv&d=AwMF-Q&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=t7GDkvcZa922K6iya7a6MxgVxxw7OjL0m1rPBXkflk4&m=6NsVdZEESTdegHN3eSmGrE_-3euko22dM4BsGgzY_UU&s=nVw6SekPrTk8gooNg28QNdHmwQ6_ilz8iuhgvSO8i7s&e=>.
> Please e-mail the Reference Library <ycba.reference at yale.edu> and the Study
> Room <ycba.studyroom at yale.edu> to request special appointments, which
> will be accommodated on a limited basis, contingent upon the construction
> schedule.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 

-- 
Matthew C. Haugen
Rare Book Cataloger
102 Butler Library
Columbia University Libraries
E-mail: matthew.haugen at columbia.edu
Phone: 212-851-2451
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20160114/d3c423ca/attachment.html>