On Wed, 8 Jan 1997, Martin Hamilton wrote:
>
> ------- Forwarded Message
>
> From: [log in to unmask]
> To: [log in to unmask] (Non Receipt Notification Requested)
> Subject: Re: Updated DC Qualifiers document
> Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 09:04:39 +0000
>
> -----Multi-Part-Message-Level-1-1-5185
> Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> > http://www.roads.lut.ac.uk/Metadata/DC-Qualifiers.html
>
> -----Multi-Part-Message-Level-1-1-5185
> Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Jim,
> A brief (well it started briefly) comment on a detail of the new DC-Qualifiers
> list - CREATOR element, USMARC Scheme:
Let me say I haven't had a chance to read this DC qualifiers document,
and am only responding to the message.
> >USMARC
> >The information provided is a field from a USMARC record. It should >start wit
> h the field number, followed by the field itself and then
> >any sub-fields.
>
> This wasn't clear to me since a USMARC field (e.g. 110 Corporate Name) is typic
> ally represented as a three digit field number, followed by two "Indicators", a
> nd a series of subfields, each preceded a subfield marker of the form $x.
>
> I guess "the field itself" refers to the $a subfield, which contains the main d
> ata element.
See the Dublin Core/MARC Crosswalk I posted a week or so ago. In many
cases it is $a. In that document I was specific about which subfield is
intended.
> Will the USMARC indicators be included ?
Defaults could be generated for the indicators. Some of these are in the
document I mentioned above.
> Would other subfields be flagged as such or simply concatenated ?
> e.g. EFILA Meeting 1996 in Brussels as CREATOR of a document:
> 1) 110EFILA, Brussels, 1996
> or (with USMARC Indicators):
> 2) 1102 EFILA, Brussels, 1996
> or (USMARC compliant with indicators and subfield tags)
> 3) 1102 $aEFILA$cBrussels$d1996
If someone wanted to upgrade these records to use separate subfields they
could, but as a simple record converted from a Dublin Core style record,
the data could all be used in $a. There would need to be a flag in the
record that indicates its origin as a Dublin Core style record. This could
be automatically generated.
> Librarians and others using USMARC (Z39.50/GILS) would find format 3) more usef
> ul, and there is a lot to be said for having some minimal compatibility between
> the data formats used by the DC elements and those used by USMARC/Z39.50/GILS/
> ZSTARTS applications.
>
> One could argue that full USMARC compliance would add extra complexity and that
> the presence of the USMARC tag in format 1) already provides useful informatio
> n about the type of CREATOR involved.
It is important not to mix up standards for data content and MARC format
standards. Issues such as giving an authoritative form of name according
to Anglo-American Cataloging Rules is an issue of data content. A record
could be MARC compliant and not follow any special rules for data content.
This is the type of record we would expect that originated in Dublin Core
style data. There are some mandatory fields, but most of these could be
set to defaults; in other cases they would most likely exist in the record
(e.g. a record would need a title field at least; probably there would be
one.)
> However a USMARC-compliant CREATOR meta-data element could be input via an entr
> y form (with simple and expert modes) without requiring the user to know about
> Indicators and the various additional subfields.
Yes, indicators could be generated according to defaults; the particular
subfield to be used is specified in the Dublin Core/MARC crosswalk.
> Software for user-friendly search/presentation of USMARC data already exists in
> the form of Z39.50 clients (field tag, indicator and subfield tag info is used
> to generate readable explanatory prefixes).
The revised DC/MARC crosswalk is intended to be used for simple
conversions (as well as complex if desired) so that there is a one to one
correlation between a DC element and a MARC field/subfield.
> Any comments ?
> PS Keep up the good work, we are following the DC developments with great inter
> est
> [log in to unmask] (Library/Internet Applications, European Commission)
Rebecca
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^ Rebecca S. Guenther ^^
^^ Senior MARC Standards Specialist ^^
^^ Network Development and MARC Standards Office ^^
^^ Library of Congress ^^
^^ Washington, DC 20540-4020 ^^
^^ (202) 707-5092 (voice) (202) 707-0115 (FAX) ^^
^^ [log in to unmask] ^^
^^ ^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|