If and when info gets approved as a URI scheme (a proposal is in to the
Internet Engineering Task Force), we could call it a URI. That brings up a
few questions about where to put it, since URIs go into 856, but generally
if they're locations ("Electronic Location and Access"). We could easily
define additional codes for use in $2 of 024-- we would probably define
"info" in the absence of approval as a URI scheme. We probably want to add
"uri" as a code for $2 now for the case of persistent identifiers
expressed as URIs.
Rebecca
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004, Karen Coyle wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 23:23, Rajesh Chandrakar wrote:
>
> > Second question, I asked to the forum regarding the
> > "Info" URIs. How should be rendered in MARC21 as I
> > found some examples in draft material of the Info URI
> > Scheme, for instances:
> >
> > 1) info:ddc/22/eng//004.678
>
> "Info" is a URI scheme for identifiers, and is not actionable, so it
> would be treated as an identifier in the MARC record. The purpose of
> info is to present identifiers in URI format for use in XML documents
> where the URI format is required. MARC does not require a URI for
> identifiers. Many of the current info identifiers have their own place
> in MARC, so you could conceivably translate them to their
> MARC-appropriate forms and fields:
>
> info:ddc/22/eng//004.678 --> 082 $a 004.678 $2 22
>
> That said, if you had an info URI that for some reason you wished to
> place in a MARC record, it seems that it would go into 024. There isn't
> a $2 code for it, but it self-identifies so that shouldn't be a problem.
> --
> -------------------------------------
> Karen Coyle
> Digital Library Specialist
> http://www.kcoyle.net
> Ph: 510-540-7596 Fax: 510-848-3913
> --------------------------------------
>
>
