Date:         Thu, 16 Mar 2006 21:22:37 +0000
Reply-To:     Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Mike Rylander <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: About the 245$h
Comments: To: Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline

On 3/16/06, Ross Singer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>  I have a question about the MARC to MODS transform.  Why does it put the
> 245 subfield h in the title tag?  This is not actually part of the title, so
> it seems to degrade the integrity of the record to put it there.
>
>  Has there been discussion to put this value somewhere else?
> physicalDescription possibly?  An attribute to "title"?
>
>  At least in MARC, it's easy to just leave out of a title... This is less
> easy in MODS post transform.  I could always just leave it out of the
> transform, but, at the same time, I don't want to /lose/ that data.
>
>  How are other people coping with this?

I'm going back and forth between whether I should modify our local
copy of the stylesheet or apply a regex based extraction on the
display side.  The former is a pain because we'd have to maintain a
forked version of the stylesheet, and the latter is a pain because it
duplicates code in every display client.

Ideally, I'd like to see 245$h as an attribute or subnode of
physicalDescription.  I lean towards attribute, because it's a
mutually exclusive list of values, but either is fine with me.  I
don't, however, think it should be constrained to what MARC21 defines
as valid values.

Another part of MARC that would be good to extract and place under
physicalDescription is all the information contained in the 007, but I
guess that's another topic.

>
>  Thanks,
>  -Ross.
>


--
Mike Rylander
[log in to unmask]
GPLS -- PINES Development
Database Developer
http://open-ils.org