Skip
repetitive navigational links
L-Soft  -  Home of  the  LISTSERV  mailing list  manager LISTSERV(R) 14.5
Skip repetitive navigational links
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (January 2004)Back to main MARC pageJoin or leave MARCReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional fontLog in
Date:         Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:06:44 -0500
Reply-To:     MARC <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       MARC <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Stone Gerald <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Proposal 2004-04 for MARC 21 field 258
Comments: To: "MARC LISTSERV (E-mail)" <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;

To reply to two recent comments concerning this proposal. On Jan. 5, 2004, Karen Coyle wrote: "1) Is there a 1xx field in these records? What does it represent? (Perhaps some full record examples would help those of us who have never seen this kind of description) 2) Is there some way that we can accomplish the needs of this community without adding an entire field? Since it appears that only a few subfields are needed, could they possibly be worked into the 260 field?" 1. Descriptions of philatelic records do, normally, carry a 1XX field. At collective levels of archival description, the 1XX field carries the provenance heading for the collection or aggregate part, e.g., file, described. For the description of discrete items, the 1XX field is used for the heading of the primary statement of responsibility, as would be the case for a monograph, sound recording, etc. As requested, we will post shortly one or two full descriptions of philatelic records. 2. Inclusion of this information in field 260 would be inappropriate in that it would combine descriptive information from two separate areas (areas 3 and 4) into a single MARC 21 field. This would establish an undesirable precedent, as no other MARC 21 field does this, to my knowledge. More to the point, including the denomination of postage stamps with the imprint (publication and manufacture details) simply does not make sense and would be confusing to philatelists, postal historians, and other users of this class of material. On Jan. 2, 2004, Gary L. Strawn wrote: "I would have thought that the 0XX block would provide a better fit for this kind of information." The philatelic issue elements - issuing jurisdiction and denomination - are descriptive elements. They are neither variable control field (00X) nor control information, number, and code data types, such as standard, classification, or call numbers, coded cartographic mathematical data (which has its Area 3 descriptive counterpart in 255), etc. For this reason, the 0XX block is inappropriate. Gerald Stone Director, Standards Centre National Archives of Canada 344 Wellington Street, Ottawa, Ont., K1A 0N3 Telephone: (613) 996-7790 Facsimile: (613) 947-1546 E-mail: <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask] Web: <http://www.archives.ca/> www.archives.ca


[text/html]


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main MARC page

LISTSERV.LOC.GOV CataList email list search Powered by LISTSERV email list manager