Cauthen, Paul (cauthep) wrote:
> 1. I think rather than reintroducing language coding to the authority
> format, we would be inclined to define 031 $z in the bib format only.
This is true in the normal U.S. context. In other contexts (e.g.
Canada, and very likely in Europe, where MARC 21 seems likely to be
making advances because MASRC 21-based library systems are increasing
their presence in the market) language is significant; 040 $b is coded
for "Language of cataloging".
As work- and expression- level treatment progresses, language of heading
(as distinct from language of cataloguing) may well become significant
again, and it's appropriate to look for ways of being consistent in its
treatment. Let alone the complications for the cataloguer entering like
data in unlike ways in different fields, programmers writing or
enhancing systems are going to get things wrong if inconsistencies in
the format proliferate.
Hal Cain <[log in to unmask]> **new e-mail address**
Joint Theological Library
Parkville, Victoria, Australia
