MARBI

The MARC Advisory Committee advises the Library of Congress concerning changes to the MARC formats. The committee meets at ALA’s midwinter and annual meetings each year. AALL’s official representative to the committee formally reports to LSRD-SIS and TS-SIS at the AALL annual meeting on the work of this important committee and publishes updates in the Technical Services Law Librarian. Requests for comments will be posted periodically to both SIS discussion lists to give the representative feedback on questions under current review.

  • 2002 MARBI Report

    SUMMARY

    MARBI approves changes to MARC 21, although the Library of Congress and the National Library of Canada have final authority. During the January and June meetings, a total of seventeen proposals and eight discussion papers were presented. The papers are available online at http://lcweb.loc.gov/marc/marbi/.

    A number of the proposals dealt with changes to the Format for Holdings Data. This format allows libraries to share specific information about complex publications, such as serials, and to transport their holdings from one system to another. Local system vendors were slow to implement this format, but have made progress recently. As more libraries implement it, they request enhancements to address the realities of library holdings.

    The Committee is moving cautiously to add online links (URIs) to various fields. A proposal to provide a link in authority records to indicate the source of data was approved, but a request for a link to credit notes in bibliographic records was not.

    A number of the proposals dealt with international issues. The Committee considered a group of proposals presented by the British Library and approved almost all of them. These changes support the UK library community=s intention to adopt MARC 21 in place of UKMARC. The Committee approved the addition of Canadian Aboriginal Syllabics to the Universal Character Set and approved the addition of a classification number field at the request of the Russian State Library.

    One of the British Library proposals added the Euro sign and Eszett character to the MARC 21 character set. This is of particular interest to law librarians, who have been trying to get the Section symbol approved for more than a decade. The difficulty is that neither OCLC nor RLIN is willing/able to implement new characters in their current systems. There is hope for us soon, however. Both utilities will move to new systems in the next few years and should then be able to accommodate expanded character sets.

    MARC 21 is not strictly tied to particular cataloging rules. Some of the proposals were for enhancements that benefit the museum and archival communities. Another made changes to accommodate Faceted Application of Subject Terminology (FAST), an OCLC project intended to assist non-catalogers as they add subject headings to metadata.

    A hot topic was Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), published by IFLA in 1998. It was the subject of two discussion papers and of a joint meeting with CC:DA. FRBR provides a framework for looking at the MARC format and our catalogs from a more theoretical perspective. It stresses the needs of the users and their need for relationships between things. It may provide a framework for solving the problems we have with multiple versions. We can expect continued discussions about FRBR which may evenutually result in reforms to MARC 21.

    FULL REPORT ACTIVITIES OF THE U.S. MARC ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2002 MARBI REPRESENTATIVE REPORT JULY 15, 2002

    During the January and June meetings of MARBI, a total of seventeen proposals and eight discussion papers were presented. At the end of this report there is a list of all of the papers with links to their full text. Once approved by the Committee, a proposal does not automatically take effect because final authority rests with the Library of Congress and the National Library of Canada, who publish revisions to the MARC 21 formats. Finally, the Library of Congress, the utilities, and local system vendors must implement the changes before you can apply them in your local library.

    Of current interest is the pending implementation of proposals approved at last year’s meetings. These include theChanges in MARC to Accommodate Seriality (http://lcweb.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2001/2001-05.html) and Making Field 260 Repeatable in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format (http://lcweb.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2001/2001-04.html). Although these were both included in the MARC 21 revisions published in October, 2001, they have not yet been implemented. The related cataloging rule revisions will be published later this summer. The associated Library of Congress Rule Interpretations will be available early in the fall. Then the Library of Congress will implement the changes on December 1, 2002. However, neither OCLC nor RLIN will fully implement these major changes until they release their new systems, probably not until Summer 2003, or later. But, OCLC and RLIN will allow serial fields in the books format in time for the Library of Congress implementation this December.

    A number of this year’s proposals dealt with changes to the MARC 21 Format for Holdings Data. The holdings format allows libraries to share specific information about complex publications such as serials, and to transport their library=s holdings from one library system to another. Local system vendors have been slow to implement this format, but have made progress recently. As more libraries implement it, they request enhancements to address the realities of library holdings. The proposals approved at this meeting dealt with fields to describe methods of acquisition, regularity of publication, and number of pieces per issuance.

    The Committee is moving cautiously to add online links (URIs) to various fields. A proposal to provide a link in authority records to indicate the source of data was approved, but a request to add a link to credit notes in bibliographic records was not.

    Some of the proposals dealt with international issues. The Committee considered a group of proposals presented by the British Library and approved almost all of them. These changes support the UK library community’s intention to adopt MARC 21 in place of UKMARC. The Committee approved the addition of Canadian Aboriginal Syllabics to the Universal Character Set and approved the addition of a classification number, defined as Other Classification Number, at the request of the Russian State Library.

    One of the British Library proposals added the Euro sign and Eszett character to the MARC 21 character set. This is of particular interest to law librarians, who have been trying to get the Section symbol approved for more than a decade. The difficulty is that neither OCLC nor RLIN is willing/able to implement new characters in their current systems. There is hope for us soon, however. Both utilities will move to new systems in the next few years and should then be able to accommodate expanded character sets.

    MARC 21 is not strictly tied to particular descriptive cataloging rules. Some of the proposals were for enhancements that benefit the museum and archival communities. Another made changes to accommodate Faceted Application of Subject Terminology (FAST), a project by OCLC intended to assist non-catalogers as they add subject headings to metadata.

    A hot topic was Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), published by IFLA in 1998. This was the subject of two discussion papers and of a joint meeting with CC:DA. FRBR provides a framework for looking at the MARC format and our current cataloging rules from a more theoretical perspective. It stresses the needs of the users and their need for relationships between things. It may provide a framework for solving the problems our users have with multiple versions. We can expect continuted discussions about FRBR which may eventually result in reforms to MARC 21.

    PROPOSALS APPROVED

    Proposal No. 2001-10R: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2001/2001-10R.html
    Definition of Additional Codes in Field 007/10 (Type of material) for Sound Recordings in the MARC 21 Bibliographic and Holdings Formats.
    Adds codes so that every type of material used in sound recordings in the Twentieth Century is included.

    Proposal No. 2002-01: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-01.html
    Definition of Subfield $u (URI) in Field 670 (Source Data Found) in the MARC 21 Authority Format.

    Proposal No. 2002-03: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-03.html
    Expanding Field 046 for Other Dates in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format.
    Adds subfield $k (Beginning or single date created) and subfield $l (Ending date created) and changes definition of subfield $j to “Date resource modified.”

    Proposal No.: 2002-04: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-04.html
    Definition of Subfield $p (Number of pieces per issuance) in Fields 853-855 of the MARC 21 Holdings Format.

    Proposal No. 2002-05: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-05.html
    Expansion of Regularity Pattern Coding in Fields 853-855 Subfield $y in the MARC 21 Holdings Format.

    Proposal No. 2002-06R: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-06R.html
    Changes in Field 008 in the MARC 21 Holdings Format.
    (Earlier Proposal 2002-06 http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-06.html)

    Proposal No. 2002-07: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-07.html
    Definition of Additional Second Indicator Values for Specific Subject Systems in Field 655 in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format.

    Proposal No. 2002-08: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-08.html
    Making the First Indicator Value 0 (U. S. Dept. of Defense Classification) Obsolete in Field 052 of the MARC 21 Bibliographic and Authority Formats.
    This fixes the problem for the U. S. National Imagery and Mapping Agency which had incorrectly coded over a million records!

    Proposal No. 2002-09: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-09.html
    Encoding Variable Length Coordinate Formats in Field 034 (Coded Cartographic Mathematical Data) in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format.

    Proposal No. 2002-10: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-10.html
    Defining URI subfields in field 506 (Restrictions on Access Note) and field 540 (Terms Governing Use and Reproduction Note) in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format.

    Proposal No. 2002-11: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-11.html
    Repertoire Expansion in the Universal Character Set for Canadian Aboriginal Syllabics.
    (Earlier Discussion Paper 2002-06 http://ww.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-dp06.html)

    Proposal No. 2002-13: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-13.html
    Changes for Faceted Application of Subject Terminology (FAST) Subject Headings.
    (Earlier Discussion Paper 2002-03 http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-dp03.html)

    Proposal No. 2002-14: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-14.html
    Changes for UKMARC Format Alignment.
    (Earlier Discussion Paper 2002-07 http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-dp07.html)

    • 2002-14/1: Revision of 008/22 (Target audience) Values.
    • 2002-14/2: Definition of Value in 008/20 (ISSN Center) for United Kingdom.
    • 2002-14/3: Definition of 008/21 (Music parts).
    • 2002-14/4: Definition of 008/33 (Transposition and Arrangement).
    • 2002-14/5: Definition of Value in 008/24-27 (Nature of Contents/Nature of Entire Work).
    • 2002-14/6: Definition of Field 038 (Record Content Owner).
    • 2002-14/7: Definition of Field 026 (Fingerprint Identifier).
    • 2002-14/8: Definition of Field 563 (Binding Information).
    • 2002-14/10: Add Euro and Eszett to MARC Character Set.

    Proposal No. 2002-15: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-15.html
    Defining field 065 (Other Classification Number) in the MARC 21 Authority Format.

    PROPOSALS NOT APPROVED

    Proposal No. 2002-02: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-02.html
    Definition of Subfields $u, $y and $3 in Fields 508 and 511 of the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format.

    Proposal No. 2002-12: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-12.html
    Coding for Publication Pattern at the First Level of Enumeration in MARC 21 Holdings Records. Proposal No. 2002-14/9: Define Fields 363 (Trade Price) and 364 (Trade Information).

    DISCUSSION PAPERS

    Discussion Paper 2002-DP01: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-dp01.html
    Coding Electronic Formats for Different Media in Field 007 of the MARC 21 Bibliographic and Holdings Formats.

    Discussion Paper 2002-DP02: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-dp02.html
    Renaming the 008 Positions to Reflect their Content in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format.

    Discussion Paper 2002-DP04 http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-dp04.html
    Addition of Imprint and Physical Description fields to the MARC 21 Holdings Format.

    Discussion Paper 2002-DP05: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-dp05.html
    Guidelines for the Nonfiling Control Character Technique in the MARC 21 Formats.

    Discussion Paper No. 2002-DP08: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2002/2002-dp08.html
    Dealing with FRBR Expressions in MARC 21.

    Submitted by
    Susan Goldner
    University of Arkansas at Little Rock /
    Pulaski County Law Library

  • 2001 MARBI Report

    2001 Annual Report — Activities of the US MARC Advisory Committee

    Prepared by Rhonda K. Lawrence, AALL Representative
    Hugh and Hazel Darling Law Library, UCLA School of Law

    American Association of Law Libraries Annual Meeting
    July 15-8, 2001, Minneapolis, Minnesota

    This is my final report as your AALL MARBI representative; I have enjoyed representing the Law Library community these past five years, and I have appreciated your support and interest in MARBI developments.

    Overview

    The MARC Advisory Committee advises the Library of Congress concerning changes to the MARC formats. The Committee membership includes the nine voting members and three interns from MARBI (Machine-Readable Bibliographic Information), an interdivisional committee of the American Library Association (ALA): ALCTS (Association for Library Collections and Technical Services); LITA (Library and Information Technology Association; and RUSA (Reference and User Services Association). Also represented are national library liaisons from LC, NLM, NAL, and the National Libraries of Canada and Australia, along with representatives from OCLC, RLG, ISM and WLN bibliographic utilities. Finally, there are the rest of us–liaisons from library associations, including the ALCTS Audiovisual Committee, CC:DA and SAC, the Art Libraries Society of North America, the Music Libraries Association, AVIAC, Map & Geography Round Table, MicroLIF, Visual Resources Association, and of course the American Association of Law Libraries.

    As usual, MARBI meetings were held at the American Library Association’s midwinter meeting, January 13-14, 2001 in Washington, D.C., and the annual meeting June in San Francisco, June 16-18th. The MARBI meetings follow a fixed agenda, including presentations of prepared discussion papers on exploratory topics, which often develop into specific proposals designed to expand, change, or modify the MARC formats. Formal proposals are also discussed and then voted on by the MARBI Advisory committee members. These discussion papers and proposals may be prepared by anyone, although most come from LC, MARC Advisory members, or by outside library or vendor groups seeking changes in the formats. If a discussion paper identifies a clear issue for which there seems to be a viable solution within the MARC 21 formats, the presenter is encouraged to return to the Committee with a specific proposal. If the proposal (which may be changed or amended several times by the Committee in a process that can take months or even years to complete) is approved by the voting majority, then LC independently reviews the proposal. While generally LC will approve and implement the proposal that MARBI has passed, in many cases the proposal is not implemented until the next MARC update is released. Often implementation is delayed even further, either by LC or the bibliographic utilities, due to the complexity and the cost of changing codes and tags.

    Highlights of the year

    Two proposals approved at the ALA 2001 annual meeting in San Francisco created the architecture for a significant restructuring of the MARC formats.

    Proposal No. 2001-05: Changes in MARC 21 to Accommodate Seriality

    Related MARBI Documents: DP114 (June 1999), DP119 (May 2000) Source: CONSER Program, Library of Congress; ISSN Center

    Summary: This proposal consists of four separate proposals for changes to MARC 21 based on revisions to the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd ed. Rev. concerning seriality. These include: 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; 4) 2001-05/4: New code in 008/34 and 006/17 Successive/Latest entry indicator for latest entry (integrating resource).

    MARBI Action Taken: All approved as written with changes to terminology; “latest entry integrating entry” was changed to “integrated entry.”

    As many of you may remember, for the past three years the former CC:DA rep Ann Sitkin and I have kept the AALL TS SIS and OBS SIS membership apprised of the discussions, drafts, task force reports, MARBI discussion papers, AALL programs, and committee recommendations regarding the impending changes to the AACR2 chapter 12 on serials and to the corresponding MARC formats. You all have been individually and collectively polled, surveyed, e-mailed, and cajoled. Now those changes are a reality; JSC has all but signed off on the revised Chapter 12, and MARBI took the plunge and approved two major proposals at the June 2001 meeting. When these new format changes are implemented, they will change your MARC coding lives.

    Proposal 2001-05 and its four parts create one of the most radical changes in the MARC formats ever. As a result of the revisions to AACR2 Chapter 12 concerning Seriality, at its June 2001 meeting MARBI approved the addition of a third bibliographic level code — code “i” for integrating resources in the Leader/07. In addition, law catalogers will now be able to code several other features of loose-leafs and other integrating resources very high up in the leaders. Other approved changes rename the serial 008 as the seriality 008, and code i’ is to be treated similarly to code s, which means the seriality 008 is to be used when type (leader/06) is a’ (textual material). This will permit libraries to track the serial nature of loose-leafs in the fixed fields, coding for regularity, frequency, etc.

    Another change to the 008/21 leader is the renaming of the type of serial to “Type of serial or integrating resource” (currently Type of serial) and define three additional codes l’ (updating loose-leaf), d’ (database), and w’ (updating Web site). The final change is the addition of a new code 2 in the 008/34 and 006/17 to represent the “integrated entry.” Currently the choices are to code 0 or 1 for successive or latest entry serial cataloging; code 2 would be a “latest entry approach for loose-leaf type entries where the latest title is recorded in the 245 field, but the title is not a serial but an integrating resource.

    These changes will enable libraries to identify loose-leafs and other types of integrating resources many purposes, including creating acquisition lists, identifying subscriptions, and limiting searches in online databases.

    Proposal No. 2001-04: Making Field 260 Repeatable in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format

    Related: DP114 (June 1999), DP119 (May 2000)

    Source: Cooperative Online Serials Program (CONSER); ISSN International Centre

    Summary: 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. It also proposes definition of subfield $3 “Materials specified.”

    MARBI Action Taken: Approved as written

    Until this proposal was approved in June 2001, field 260 was currently defined as not repeatable. This proposal makes field 260 repeatable for resources that change over time so that both earliest, current, and, if desired, intervening publishing information could be included in the record. Resources that change over time include multipart monographs, serials, and the newly defined AACR category of integrating resources. Integrating resources include databases, Web sites, and updating loose-leafs. Repeatability of field 260 is not intended for multiple versions of a work published by different publishers.

    Basically the proposal does the following: In field 260 (Publication, Distribution, Etc. (Imprint) of the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format:

      • Makes the field repeatable for changes in publisher over time.
      • Defines the first indicator as sequence of publishing statements with the following values:
        # Not applicable/ No information provided/Earliest available publisher
        2 Current publisher
        3 Intervening publishers
      • Defines subfield $3 (Materials specified) for use with 260 fields

    The following illustrates how changing publisher statements might be recorded.

    260 ## $a Paris ; $a New York : $b Vogue, $c 1964-

    260 3# $3 1980-May 1993 $a London : $b Vogue

    260 2# $3 June 1993- $a London : $b Elle

    ANNOUNCEMENTS:

    Library of Congress Report

    Rebecca Guenther (LC) described the new Classification Web pilot program from CDs that provides easy access to up-to-date LC Classification data; the program has been extended through August 2001. Pricing information will be out soon. More information about Classification Web can be found on the CDs website at: www.loc.gov/CDs/.

    UKMARC Harmonization Efforts

    Alan Danskin (British Library) stated that a survey was given to UK librarians and the results found that the majority of British librarians want to harmonize with MARC 21. In light of this clear mandate, the BL Executive Committee has decided to adopt the MARC 21 format. The results of this survey can be found on the UKMARC website at: www.bl.uk/services/bsds/nbs/marc21survey.html.

    SUMMARY OF OTHER MARBI 2001 PROPOSALS

    Proposal No: 2001-01: Designating Taxonomic Hierarchies in Field 754 (Added Entry–Taxonomic Identification) in the Bibliographic Format Related MARBI Documents: 2000-08 (May 2000)

    SOURCE: Florida Center for Library Automation

    SUMMARY: This paper proposes adding subfields $c and $z to field 754 to designate the taxonomic hierarchy of the data in subfield $a and to provide a public note. Likewise, the redefinition of subfield $a is proposed to contain the taxonomic name only.

    MARBI Action Taken: After discussion a motion was made to accept the proposal with the following modifications: 1) Add subfield $x (Non-Public note) and subfield $z (Public Note) as a repeatable subfields; 2) Specify that subfield $z will not be used for common or alternative name, but for other types of public notes; 3) Add another repeatable subfield in field 754 for the Common/alternative name (to be determined by LC). The motion as amended carried with a unanimous vote of 7-0 at the January meetings.

    Proposal 2001-02: Non-MARC Country Codes in Fields 043 (Geographic Area Code) and 044 (Country of Publishing/Producing Entity Code) Related MARBI Documents: DP 98 (December 1996); 97-11 (May 1997)

    Source: Library of Congress; OCLC CORC

    Summary: This paper proposes that subfield $c (ISO code) in field 043 (Geographic Area Code) be defined to allow for the use of an ISO 3166 country code. Likewise, it also proposes that subfield $c (ISO subentity code) in field 044 (Country of publishing/producing entity code) be redefined as ISO code to allow for the use of an ISO 3166 country code as well as an ISO subentity code.

    MARBI Action Taken: Passed as written by a unanimous vote at the Midwinter meeting.

    Proposal No. 2001-03: Identification of Source in Field 015 (National Bibliography Number) and Field 017 (Copyright Registration Number) in the Bibliographic Format  Related MARBI Documents: none

    Source: Russian State Library

    Summary: This paper proposes defining subfield $2 (Source) in field 015 (National Bibliography Number) and field 017 (Copyright Registration Number) to identifying the source of the number. It also proposes making field 015 repeatable for multiple numbers from different sources.

    MARBI Action Taken: MARBI voted 7-0 to pass the proposal as written at ALA Midwinter.

    ® Proposal No. 2001-06: Accommodating Non-MARC Language Codes in Field 041 of the Bibliographic and Community Information Formats Related MARBI Documents: DP 2001-DP02

    Source: Library of Congress; OCLC CORC

    Summary: Proposes changes to accommodate non-MARC language codes in field 041 (Language code). Changing the repeatability of both field 041 and subfields $a-$g is suggested. Defining the second indicator position (Source of code) and subfield $2 (Source of code) is also proposed to identify the source of the language codes used. Lengthy discussion ensued about complexity of dealing with stacked language codes and legacy data. Concern expressed about making wording in the proposal to eliminate stacking, which utilities said they could not do with legacy data.

    MARBI Action Taken: Passed as proposed with a change to the wording to make the stacking of language codes in field 041 obsolete.

    Proposal No. 2001-07: Repeatability of Field 508 in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format

    Related MARBI Documents: none

    Source: ALCTS Media Resources Committee; Association of Moving Image Archivists (AMIA); Cataloging Policy Committee of Online Audiovisual Catalogers, Inc. (CAPC) Summary: This paper proposes changing the repeatability of field 508 in the MARC 21 bibliographic format to enable recording of complex and multiple credit notes.

    MARBI Action Taken: Passed at ALA Annual.

    Proposal No. 2001-08: Coding DVDs in Field 007 for Videorecordings in the MARC 21 Bibliographic and Holdings Formats

    Related MARBI Documents: none

    Source: Library of Congress Summary: Proposes adding a byte for DVDs in field 007/04 for videorecordings to differentiate them from other videodiscs. Several comments made about technical accuracy of distinctions made in the proposal between laser discs and DVDs, and the appropriate coding.

    MARBI Action Taken: Proposal approved with changes to coding for dimensions, and removal of the word optical.

    ® Proposal No. 2001-09: Mapping of EACC Characters to Unicode/UCS

    Related MARBI Documents: none

    Source: Library of Congress

    Summary: Proposes a mapping of characters from the MARC East Asian Character Set (EACC) to Unicode/UCS The East Asian Character Code (EACC) is a bibliographic character set for Chinese, Japanese, and Korean (CJK) approved for use in MARC 21 records. Developed by the Research Libraries Group in 1983, EACC was approved as an American National Standard, ANSI/NISO Z39.64, in 1989. The EACC repertoire contained 15,728 characters (15,704 from version L of the CJK thesaurus + the CJK space + 23 punctuation and pronunciation mark) as of May 2001. The East Asian Character Set Task Force was formed by MARBI in 1997 to establish mappings between EACC and Unicode. The work of the Task Force focused specifically on reviewing mappings of East Asian characters already done by the Unicode Consortium, identifying characters missing from Unicode, establishing mappings for Korean hangul, Japanese kana, CJK punctuation and component characters, and working out a solution for mapping duplicate and variant ideographic characters.

    MARBI Action Taken: Accepted as the MARC (EACC) mappings to Unicode/UCS the 13,226 mappings developed by the Unicode Consortium, as amended by the corrections and the 2,490 additional mappings developed by the MARBI East Asian Character Set Task Force. Also thanked and lauded the Task Force and in particular Joan Aliprand of RLG for the outstanding work performed.

    Proposal No. 2001-10: Definition of Additional Codes in Field 007/10 for Sound Recordings in the MARC 21 Bibliographic and Holdings Formats

    Related MARBI Documents: none

    Source: Library of Congress

    Summary: Proposes expanding field 007/10 to describe additional materials used in the manufacture of sound recordings.

    MARBI Action Taken: Following discussion about the technical accuracy and omissions of various physical types in the proposed coding, MARBI tabled review of this proposal until technical experts could review the preservation types.

    Proposal No. 2001-11: Definition of Field 887 (Non-MARC Information Field) in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format

    Related MARBI Documents: none

    Source: Library of Congress; Cooperative Online Resource Catalog (CORC)

    Summary: 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 (such as Dublin Core). The field is modeled after field 886 (Foreign MARC Information Field).

    MARBI Action Taken: Passed as written. MARBI 2001 DISCUSSION PAPERS

    Discussion Paper 2001-DP01: Recording Narrators in Fields 508 and 511 in the Bibliographic Format

    Recording Narrators in Fields 508 and 511

    Related MARBI Documents: none Source: Oakville Public Library

    Summary: Discusses the possibility of changing the scope of fields 508 and 511 in the MARC 21 bibliographic format. Because there has been inconsistent coding of “Narrator” in both fields 508 and 511, changing the definition of these fields would end confusion and standardize coding practices.

    MARBI Action Taken: MARBI decided that narrators should be coded only in field 511 to eliminate inconsistent coding practices and possible information retrieval problems. No one believed that redefining the first indicator value 3 (Narrators) in field 511 would assist in indicating the narrators’ roles of participation when differentiating them from cast members. A formal proposal was not considered necessary for this change, however, LC will alter its documentation to reflect the new coding practice in the immediate future.

    Discussion Paper 2001-DP02: Non-MARC Language Codes in Field 041

    Related MARBI Documents: none Source: Library of Congress; OCLC CORC

    Summary: Discusses four different approaches to using non-MARC language codes in MARC 21 bibliographic and community information records.

    MARBI Action Taken: The following decisions were made for field 041: 1) Repeat the subfields for each code recorded. 2) Repeat field 041 to indicate the use of different language code schemes in a record to aid in system processing. 3) Define an indicator value and subfield $2 to identify the source of the language codes used. MARBI agreed that there should be further discussion about the legacy records containing stacked codes. The group should also look further into the possible impact that these changes may have on the bibliographic community. A proposal paper reflecting these decisions will be presented at the annual 2001 meeting.

    Discussion Paper 2001-DP03: Types of Dates for Electronic Resources

    Related MARBI Documents: 98-04; 98-07

    Source: Library of Congress; CORC

    Summary: Reviews the different types of dates for electronic resources that are used as qualifiers in the Dublin Core Metadata Element Set and how they correspond with defined MARC 21 fields. Discusses whether some specific types of dates, which do not have an accurate mapping to MARC 21, are important for bibliographic description and, if so, alternatives for providing appropriate fields/subfields for them.

    MARBI Action Taken: Participants felt that field 046 would be better for other dates since it is more expandable. A new discussion paper was requested for the annual 2001 meeting focusing on using field 046 with the following points:

    • Add non-repeatable subfield $2 to show how the date is structured.
    • Make the field repeatable if subfield $2 is used
    • Harmonize the field in the Bibliographic and Community Information formats.
    • Consider what other dates of importance are needed beyond electronic resources or in specialized communities.
    • Consider how date modified would be applied for loose-leaf materials.
    • Look at the relationship between 046 and other elements

    ® Discussion Paper 2001-DP04: Expanding Field 046 for Other Dates in the MARC 21 Bibliographic and Community Information Formats Related MARBI Documents: 98-04 (January 1998); 98-07 (June 1998); 2001-DP03 (January 2001)

    Source: Library of Congress; CORC

    Summary: Explores whether some specific 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) as an alternative for providing appropriate places for them.

    MARBI Action Taken: After discussion about data would be used to record date information, and how loose-leaf releases could use date of release as date record in the 046, LC was encouraged to come back with a proposal.

    ® Discussion Paper 2001-DP05: Multilingual Authority Records in the MARC 21 Authority Format Related MARBI Documents: 96-10 (July 1996), 97-10 (May 1997), DP100 (June 1997), DP108 (May 1998), DP109 (May 1998)

    Source: MARBI Multilingual Record Task Force

    Summary: This paper explores how to handle multilingual records in the MARC 21 authority format. Three models are discussed, along with recommendations from the MARBI Multilingual Record Task Force.

    MARBI Action Taken: Task Force will continue to explore options. Will rename paper “Context Sensitive” authority records.

    Discussion Paper 2001-DP06: Coding Series Numbering in the MARC 21 Bibliographic and Authority Formats

    Related MARBI Documents: none

    Source: PCC Working Group on Series Numbering Summary: This paper describes a situation that suggests a possible change to subfield $v in the 4XX and 8XX fields of the MARC 21 bibliographic format, and/or a change to the 642 field of the MARC 21 authority format for proper sorting of series headings. The paper suggests either a change to coding practice using existing MARC content designation, or a change to MARC content designation.

    MARBI Action Taken: Recommended that PCC first look to vendors to implement normalization and filing rules. Problem of legacy data lacking suggested coding changes.

    Discussion Paper 2001-DP07: Name/Title of Unit in MARC 21 Holdings Records Related MARBI Documents: 89-8/5; 89-8/7

    Source: CONSER Task Force on Publication Patterns and Holdings Summary: Discusses the relationship between field 844 (Name of Unit) and subfield $o in fields 854/864 and 855/865. It considers how to record a distinctive title associated with a basic bibliographic unit that applies only to a constituent part.

    MARBI Action Taken: Suggested follow-up discussion paper.

    Discussion Paper 2001-DP08: Coding for Publication Pattern at the First Level of Enumeration in MARC 21 Holdings Records

    Related MARBI Documents: none

    Source: CONSER Task Force on Publication Patterns and Holdings Summary: Considers the need to code publication pattern subfields $v (Numbering continuity), $u (Bibliographic units per next higher level), and $x (Calendar change) in fields 853-855 when only one level of enumeration is present. This is necessary for accurate predictive check-in and to eliminate inconsistencies in coding. The format currently specifies that these subfields are not used at the first level of enumeration and that they only apply to secondary levels. It would result in a coding practice change and revision of description of these subfields, but not a change to the content designators.

    MARBI Action Taken: NLM would like to see CONSER come forward with a proposal on this.

    Discussion Paper 2001-DP09: Repeatability of Subfield $w in Fields 853-855 of the MARC 21 Holdings Format

    Related MARBI Documents: none

    Source: CONSER Task Force on Publication Patterns and Holdings Summary: Explores repeating subfield $w in fields 853-855 in cases where multi-part titles are issued in a specified frequency. This would allow coding for both when to expect an issue (its issuing frequency) and how many pieces per year of an issue are expected.

    MARBI Action Taken: Group would like to see a proposal; needs to distinguish between frequency in the bib record and issuance in the holdings record.

     

    Discussion Paper 2001-DP10: Incrementing Intervals in Publication Patterns in the MARC 21 Holdings Format Related MARBI Documents: 2001-DP11

    Source: CONSER Task Force on Publication Patterns and Holdings Summary: Considers methods to code for titles with multiple basic components that sequence their enumeration with skipped numbers, such as the practice of using either even or odd numbers to identify serial issues.

    MARBI Action Taken: Recommended that LC move forward with this as a proposal.

    Discussion Paper 2001-DP11: Spans of Enumeration and Chronology in Expressing Publication Patterns in the MARC 21 Holdings Format Related MARBI Documents: 2001-DP10 (June 2001) Source: CONSER Task Force on Publication Patterns and Holdings Summary: Considers alternatives for expressing patterns for enumeration and chronology that span issues or years. Alternatives considered are the addition of a new subfield $p (Span interval) or enhancement of subfield $y (Regularity pattern).

    MARBI Action Taken: MARBI liked the technique, but suggested that LC come back with a different enumeration system.