Date:         Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:19:55 -0700
Reply-To:     UNICODE-MARC Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       UNICODE-MARC Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Ed Glazier <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: MARC-specific exclusions: Paragraph mark
Comments: To: UNICODE-MARC Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

I want to respond to only one small item in Karen Coyle's message about
MARC-specific exclusions:

'Think of all of the ways that cataloging, and the MARC records that
carry the cataloging, vary from what "normal text" would look like. We
don't put paragraphs into MARC records (i.e. no CR).'

Although it is true that we don't put paragraphs into MARC records, lengthy
summary notes (MARC 21 field 520) and Biographical and Historical Data
notes (MARC 21 field 545) regularly appear in records for archival
collections.  In many cases, such notes are so long that readability and
comprehension would benefit from user-supplied paragraphing, as opposed to
system-supplied paragraphing in formatted displays.  In addition, retaining
paragraph marks could facilitate cutting-and-pasting from textual sources.
In some cases, using subfield u to contain a URI to link to external
information might be seen as a substitute for long notes, but that is
probably more common for published materials where one might link to
publishers' descriptions, etc.

Ed Glazier
Principal  Analyst
RLG
2029 Stierlin Court
Suite 100
Mountain View, CA 94043-4684
[log in to unmask]
(650) 691-2261; fax (650) 964-0943