We aren't displaying them at all in our OPAC as they don't seem to be designed to be understood by normal humans! Eventually we expect the will take over from the fixed fields in mapping to useful facets to limit searches. As far as the library staff view is concerned we try hard, sometimes against the worst efforts of our LMS, to keep MARC tags in numerical order as that makes it so much easier for a cataloguer to spot when something is missing or miscoded. If we wanted them to display in the OPAC we would be able to put them wherever we wanted within the bibliographic record. I suppose according to ISBD they ought to go right at the beginning...
--
Rose-Ann Movsovic
Collections Manager
University of Reading Library
________________________________________
From: Bibliographic standards in UK libraries [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of HARDWICK, Ruth [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 03 June 2013 14:49
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Use of fields in RDA MARC 21records
Hello – I wondered if I could ask about the positioning of RDA fields 336-338 in a bibliographic record. Should they always be situated in the middle of the MARC record (i.e. the fields following in a numerical sequence)? We were wondering if they could be located at the end of the record, following the subject headings, as the clear display of subjects is important to us. Has anyone heard of this approach, or would this be counter to the new approach for FRBR/RDA?
Also, is an 046 field in an authority record mandatory when you state someone’s date of birth?
With many thanks
Ruth Hardwick
House of Lords Library
________________________________
UK Parliament Disclaimer:
This e-mail is confidential to the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying is not permitted. This e-mail has been checked for viruses, but no liability is accepted for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail.
|