Tag Info

Back when I was more active in them, the Koha and Evergreen communities routinely got questions about when those platforms were going to support "non-MARC" data. There were a few types of folks with these requests: De facto catalogers who thought "MARC is too hard", by which they mostly meant "this cataloging interface sucks". They were rather correct. ...

Phew. I think the answer to your question reflects organizational realities more than technological ones. The libraries I've worked in had an entire department devoted to MARC cataloging. Anything else lived in the wainscoting -- the impoverished digital library, or the starved, staggering, scorned institutional repository. Whatever Those People Over There ...

Combinations that of presence or absence occur with very low frequency are almost always incorrect. There have been some studies from UNT and OCLC; you can get more accurate results by on record type, tag/tag conditional frequencies, etc. Using something like Apriori style association-rule mining can be quite useful. It is fairly easy to get a list ...

Well, I suspect MarcEdit is what you want... but you'll need a Windows environment to run it. Any of the various ways to run Windows on a Mac should be fine, but I don't know if it will run on the WINE emulator for Linux. Anybody else know?

In AACR2 for up to three authors, you will see the first author in the 1XX field and the additional authors in the 7XX field. So, the first two examples you listed will look like this: 1. 1XX Dewey 7XX Cheatem 2. 1XX Dewey 7XX Cheatem 7XX Howe For an item that has more than three authors, the title becomes the main entry and the first author listed is ...

I can think of a couple of possible solutions, depending on how frequently you need to do it and your comfort with different tools. First, MarcEdit is a wonderful tool for manipulating MARC files: http://people.oregonstate.edu/~reeset/marcedit/html/index.php. The MARC Tools tab/window has options for combining/breaking MARC files. I think the MARC Join ...

No. The 490 field is taken directly from the item. The 8xx field is an authority field, so you use would use established names to describe those associated with the item (like the personal name or corporate name). You would get this information from LOC Authorities. Use 490 and 8xx fields for series data. Use field 490 for series statements ...

I think you might be talking about the 500 field which is for "General Notes". You'll often find DVDs that are based off books have "Based on the novel by..." in this field. http://www.oclc.org/bibformats/es/5xx/default.shtm As for the records to recognize each other and allowing a patron to select which formats to put on hold based off one entry in the ...

In academic libraries today, "working with non-MARC data" is frequently a very different beast than "working with MARC data". Different underlying technologies are involved, as well as different approaches to creating, maintaining, and reusing that data. The former is often a shorthand or code for an entire skillset and approach to work by the individual ...

I haven't personally seen an ILS-agnostic application that provides useful crossreferences to MARC specifications within the user interface. Some cataloging applications (e.g. those that are part of an ILS, or OCLC Connexion) do, but that presumes that you'll be using that system to do your cataloging. For example, see the Koha documentation on their ...

Take a look at ONIX code lists: http://www.editeur.org/ONIX/book/codelists/current.html ...especially List 163, Publishing date role and some of the other "date role" lists for an overview of what the publishing industry considers important to describe...

KatieR is right. An 830 must be justified by a transcribed series statement elsewhere in the record. This will almost always be a 490, but can also be weird places like a 533 $f (Series statement of reproduction). In older records, you might also see a 440 which acts as a combined transcribed series statement and authorized form in one field, but it is ...

You may be able to make use of the Perl modules MARC::Lint [1], MARC::Lintadditions [2], and MARC::Errorchecks [3], either by directly or by examining the code to develop the checks/validation you wish to perform. [1] http://search.cpan.org/~eijabb/MARC-Lint-1.45/ [2] home.comcast.net/~eijabb/bryanmodules/MARC-Lintadditions-1.15.tar.gz [3] ...

LoC published some documentation about how MARC records could be used to identify holdings that are the same work or a related work (in the context of FRBR). In the relevant section about identifying matching or related works, it has this to say: ...records for the "same work" are considered to include two groups: records that match on the name ...

I agree with dsalo and Jenn Riley above but to address the last part of the OP's question---how we might talk about this in more concrete terms---there might be value in beginning to be more careful with our use of the terminology around MARC. "MARC" is a carrier/format, the content standards that govern what information gets conveyed around in MARC format ...

The "Expanded MARC" view was removed as part of an effort to simplify the display options in the OPAC. Details can be found in Koha bug 5106. At the time that the Expanded MARC tab was removed, a "view plain" link was added to the labelled MARC view; clicking on it will show a cataloger-friendly representation of the MARC record.

A small membership library that I belong to in Melbourne, Australia uses Koha, and i've just logged into my account from home and clicked on a book I have out, and am able to get the normal MARC view from there. But I'm not sure about the expanded view from the point of view of the staffer doing the cataloguing.

I'm not entirely clear what the problem is, but the section in the manual on importing records is at http://manual.koha-community.org/3.8/en/catalogtools.html#stagemarc The example records you link to are all MARC21, since the United States uses MARC21. As for the encoding, I don't know, but I'd try UTF-8 first, and if that doesn't work (you get weird ...

The rule of three is in AACR2 back when cataloging was card based and we had a very limited amount of space (an index card) to record the description. You only recorded up to the first three authors, with the first author being the primary. If you had more than 3 authors, you had the option of only recording the primary, up to three, or in the case of no ...

Linking entries in MARC already exist: the 76x-78x fields. They've been used for serials (continuing resources) for years. http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd76x78x.html The 776 field is specifically for other formats. So linking between the print and the online versions, or the print and the audio versions, for example. This is limited to a purely ...

The answer to your question is a matter of opinion; with that disclaimer, I think the answer should be: "No, there is no good way of encoding the relationship of the adaptation to the original item". MARC can only manage a general note, as Katie R. mentions, which isn't usable by an OPAC, and oft overlooked by the human searchers. John Flatness has ...