Since upgrading to Release 2000 (update B at present) we have noticed
changes in the appearance of the 008 fields in our bib records when editing.
Field labels have changed and the number of fields have changed.
We don't appear to have lost any data but this was our first concern.
For monographs (we use BIB LVL code m) we now see 31 data elements instead
of the previous 25.
In release 12 the editing screen would vary according to the BIB LVL code
of the record. For example our periodicals records coded 's' had a screen
with 27 data elements and the field labels were reasonably meaningful.
In Release 2000 the editing screen always has the same 31 elements
regardless of the BIB LVL code.
There are advantages to us in having the same standard editing screen. For
example we use BIB LVL codes to identify special collections material and
previously in Release 12 the code that we used produced a non standard
display in the 008.
The downside of this is the lack of meaningful field labels for our
periodicals records. We think that we have worked out the template for how
the data has transferred from Release 12 into Release 2000 but would
welcome any comments.
Also does anyone know anything about field 30 Period'l ?
I don't know if this is something that has happened to all sites or whether
it is connected to us being a UKMARC site?
I cannot find anything in the new release notes, the new manual or CSDIRECT
which describes these changes. All comments and information welcome. I plan
to ask for clarification from help desk but wanted to ask the list first.
Thanks
Janet
Janet Aucock
Systems Manager and Head of Cataloguing
University Library
North Street
St Andrews
Fife
KY16 9TR
Tel. work: 01334 462299/462315
Tel. home: 01334 828742
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|