PROPOSAL 96-8/520: New indicator value for field 520 (Summary,
Etc. Note)
DATE: December 15, 1996
REVISED: February 28, 1997
SUMMARY: Add a new first indicator to field 520 (Summary, Etc.
Note) to identify archival scope and content summaries
and change field and subfield names in the Bibliographic
format.
KEYWORDS: 520; Archival scope and content
________________________________________________
1. BACKGROUND
Field 520 in USMARC and CAN/MARC has the following 1st indicator
defined:
First Display constant controller
# No information provided (Summary)
0 Subject
1 Review
8 No display constant generated
Archivists have a special type of summary that they include on
records and need a new display constant to assist in display of
this information.
2. DISCUSSION
The Canadian archivists need to be able to distinguish and
meaningfully label in displays a special type of summary that is
included in their records. The summary contains information about
the scope, contents, and internal structure of the records that is
important to the understanding of the records and of their
creation. The display constant would be "Scope and content".
Example:
Scope and content: Series consists of minutes of meetings of
the Board together with correspondence and other documents
referred to in the minutes. The records reflect ...
Also the term "note" does not apply to the Canadian archivists' use
of the field.
3. PROPOSED CHANGE
In the Bibliographic format:
- Add the following value to the 1st indicator in field 520
(Summary, Etc., Note):
2 Scope and content
The associated display constant would be "Scope and content:".
- Change the name of the field to: Summary, Etc.
- Change the name of the subfield $a from Summary, etc. note to
Summary, etc.
- Change the name of the subfield $b from Expansion of summary,
etc. note to Expansion.
4. APPROVED CHANGE
Proposed change approved with the following addition:
- Add the following value to the 1st indicator in field 520
(Summary, Etc., Note):
3 Abstract
*******************************************************
PROPOSAL 96-8/542: New field 542 for location of related
archival materials
DATE: December 15, 1996
REVISED: February 28, 1997
SUMMARY: Accomodate data on related archival materials with a new
field 542 (Location of related archival materials) or
with an indicator added to field 544 (currently titled
Location of Associated Archival Materials) in the
Bibliographic format.
KEYWORDS: 544; 542; Related archival materials; Associated archival
materials
________________________________________________
1. BACKGROUND
Field 544 in USMARC and CAN/MARC is defined for the name and
address of custodians of archival materials that are related to the
described materials by provenance, specifically by having been a
part of the same collection or record group. It is defined as
follows:
544 Location of Associated Archival Materials Note (R)
Indicators
Undefined; contain blanks
Subfield Codes
$a Custodian (R)
$b Address (R)
$c Country (R)
$d Title of associated materials (R)
$e Provenance of associated materials (R)
$3 Materials specified (NR)
$6 Linkage (NR)
The above field has primarily been used for archival material held
at another archive, but could have also been used in the US for
related material held in the same archive.
2. DISCUSSION
Canadian archivists have expressed the need to make a distinction
between archival materials with the same provenance residing in a
different repository (associated), and archival materials with
different provenance but shared sphere of activity residing in the
same repository (related). They require the distinction between
the two types of locations, associated and related, in order to
differentiate them in displays and indexing. They have recently
developed a field for related archival material, reserving the 544
field for associated archival material. Field 542 contains the
same content designation as the 544 except there is no need for
address or country subfields since the related materials are in the
same repository as the material described in the record.
3. PROPOSED CHANGE
In the Bibliographic format:
Add new field 542 for related archival material as follows -
542 Location of Related Archival Materials Note (R)
Indicators
Undefined; contain blanks
Subfield Codes
$a Related material note (NR)
$d Title of related materials (R)
$e Provenance of related materials (R)
$3 Materials specified (NR)
$6 Linkage (NR)
542 ##$aOther records relating to the delivery of health care
services can be found in the Health Care Services
Division files of the Dept. of Health fonds.
542 ##$dDept. of Health fonds, Health Care Services Division
files
4. APPROVED CHANGE
In the Bibliographic format:
Make the following changes to field 544 (Location of Associated
Archival Materials Note)
- Add the following 1st indicator:
Indicator 1 - Relationship
# No information provided
0 Associated materials
1 Related materials
- Change the name of the field to: Location of Other Archival
Materials Note.
- Change the names of the following subfields:
$d Title of materials
$e Provenance of materials
- Add the following subfield:
$n Note
*******************************************************
PROPOSAL 96-8/545: New indicator for field 545 (Biographical or
Historical Note)
DATE: December 15, 1996
REVISED: February 28, 1997
SUMMARY: Add a first indicator to field 545 (Biographical or
Historical Note) to identify whether biographical and
administrative history information is contained in the
field and change field and subfield names in the
Bibliographic format.
KEYWORDS: 545; Biographical sketch; Administrative history
________________________________________________
1. BACKGROUND
Field 545 (Biographical or Historical Note) was defined in USMARC
in 1973 for manuscript and archival material and expanded in scope
by archivists in the early 1980s. It was also defined in CAN/MARC.
545 Biographical or Historical Note (R)
Indicators
Undefined; contain blanks
Subfield Codes
#a Biographical or historical note (NR)
#b Expansion of biographical or historical note (NR)
#6 Linkage (NR)
2. DISCUSSION
The Canadian archivists need to distinguish between biographical
sketches of persons or families and administrative histories of
corporate bodies, both of which are carried in field 545. It is
necessary to have the option to treat personal/family sketches in
one way and administrative in another, especially indexing
(searching) and display. Also the term "note" does not apply to
the Canadian archivists' use of the field.
This was reviewed by a subcommittee of the SAA's CAIE and they felt
the distinction would be useful for American archivists and that
they would use the new values.
3. PROPOSED CHANGE; APPROVED CHANGE
In the Bibliographic format:
- Add the following 1st indicator to field 545 (Biographical or
Historical Note):
Indicator 1 - Type of Data
# No information provided
0 Biographical sketch
1 Administrative history
- Change the name of the field to: Biographical or Historical
Data.
- Change the name of subfield $a from Biographical or historical
note to Biographical or historical data.
- Change the name of subfield $b from Expansion of biographical
or historical note to Expansion.
*******************************************************
PROPOSAL 96-8/561: Changes to field 561 (Provenance)
DATE: December 15, 1996
REVISED: February 28, 1997
SUMMARY: Change name of field 561 from Provenance to Custodial
History and make subfield $b obsolete in the
Bibliographic format.
KEYWORDS: 561; Provenance; Custodial history
________________________________________________
1. BACKGROUND
Field 561 (Provenance) was defined in USMARC in 1983 at the request
of archivists.
561 Provenance Note (R)
Indicators
Undefined; contain blanks
Subfield Codes
$a Provenance (NR)
$b Time of collation (NR)
$3 Materials specified (NR)
$5 Institution to which field applies (NR)
$6 Linkage (NR)
The provenance or custodial data had formerly been carried in field
541, which was at the same time changed to Immediate Source of
Acquisition. Both fields are also defined in CAN/MARC.
2. DISCUSSION
The Canadian archivists need to include custodian information in
their records, as prescribed by the Canadian RAD. This
information -- history of the custody of the unit being described
such as successive transfers of ownership and custody of control of
material, along with dates -- corresponds to that in the current
USMARC and CAN/MARC field 561. In the discussions between US and
Canadian archivists in November 1996 it was decided that "Custodial
history" would be a clearer name for the field and that the field
should be simplified by making obsolete subfield $b (Time of
collation). This latter information may appear at various places
in the history information thus the subfield has not been used by
archivists. The time information belongs in subfield $a according
to both the APPM and RAD rules.
Example (1980 is the collation "time"):
561 ##$aEastern Kings Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
records were sent to the Universalist Unitarian Church in
Halifax for safekeeping in 1980 and transferred to the
Public Archives of Nova Scotia with the Universalist
Unitarian Church of Halifax records.
Also the term "note" does not apply to the Canadian archivists' use
of the field.
USMARC Advisory Group comments, February 1997
- To archivists, provenance actually refers to the creator,
collector, user of the records, and would therefore be designated
in the 1XX or 7XX field.
- To archivists, custodians and owners are the holders of the
records, other thant he creator, collector, user; holders of the
records; agencies of persons to which the creators pass the
records.
- It was noted that other communities may use the terms slightly
differently so the definitions in the field description should make
clear the content.
3. PROPOSED CHANGE
In the Bibliographic format:
Make the following changes to field 561 (Provenance)
- Change the name of the field to Custodial History.
- Change the name of subfield $a from Provenance to
Custodial history
- Make subfield $b (Time of collation) obsolete. Include
period of collation data in subfield $a (Custodial
history)
4. APPROVED CHANGE
In the Bibliographic format:
Make the following changes to field 561 (Provenance)
- Change the name of the field to Ownership and Custodial
History.
- Change the name of subfield $a from Provenance to History
- Make subfield $b (Time of collation) obsolete. Include period
of collation data in subfield $a (Custodial history)
*******************************************************
PROPOSAL 96-8/9XX: Add fields in the 9XX Range
DATE: May 24, 1996
REVISED: February 28, 1997
SUMMARY: Add fields in the 9XX range that are used by the National
Library of Canada to the Bibliographic format.
KEYWORDS: 9XX; Local fields
________________________________________________
1. BACKGROUND
CAN/MARC has 14 valid fields in the 9XX range that are currently
used to give two types of information in bibliographic records.
Equivalent names - for names and uniform titles found in the record
as main or added entries for which there is an official French and
English form. The equivalent form is in the 9XX field.
110 2#$aBibliotheque nationale du Canada
910 2#$aNational Library of Canada
Cross-references - for cross-references to headings used as main or
added entries. This use does not appear to be linguistically
motivated.
700 1#$aGuy, Elizabeth Benson
900 2#$aBenson-Guy, Elizabeth
110 2#$aResearch Council of Alberta
910 2#$aAlberta Research Council
Formerly, history notes about corporate bodies also went into this
field.
The fields are:
900 Equivalence or Cross-reference - Personal Name
910 Equivalence, Cross-reference or History Note - Corporate Name
911 Equivalence, Cross-reference or History Note - Conference or
Meeting Name
930 Equivalence or Cross-reference - Uniform Title Heading
940 Equivalence or Cross-reference - Uniform Title
943 Equivalence or Cross-reference - Collective Title
945 Equivalence or Cross-reference - Title
951 Equivalence or Cross-reference - Geographic Name/Area Name
952 Equivalence or Cross-reference - Hierarchical Place Name
980 Equivalence or Cross-reference - Series Statement - Personal
Name
981 Equivalence, Cross-reference or History Note - Series
Statement - Corporate Name
982 Equivalence, Cross-reference or History Note - Series
Statement - Conference or Meeting Name
983 Equivalence or Cross-reference - Series Statement -
Title/Uniform Title
990 Link to Equivalences, Cross-references, and History Notes
Canada is a country with two official languages. This condition
creates specific bibliographic needs to which the National Library
of Canada has a requirement to respond. The principles behind the
National Library of Canada's bilingual cataloguing policy were
formulated by the Canadian Task Group on Cataloguing Standards in
1972. Unilingual publications are catalogued in the language of
the item but include subject headings in both English and French;
two separate records are created for bilingual publications with
the English-language cataloguing carrying the English subject
headings and the French-language cataloguing carrying the French
subject headings. With regard to headings, bibliographic records
for unilingual publications carry headings in 9XX equivalent fields
so that users of NLC products have access to headings in the
language of their catalogue.
The 9XX fields are an integral feature of the CAN/MARC
communication format. In aligning CAN/MARC with USMARC, the
National Library of Canada and Canadian Committee on MARC are
proposing that the Canadian 9XX fields be documented in an appendix
to the harmonized format.
2. DISCUSSION
At issue is whether the harmonized documentation should contain an
appendix to support the Canadian requirement of providing
bibliographic service to both English and French users or whether
this information should be relegated to documentation outside the
format. If the new harmonized format is to replace CAN/MARC, NLC
requests that the 9XX block be included in an appendix.
An underlying principle for the USMARC format is that the 9XX tags
(along with other tags and values that contain a 9) are reserved
for local definition. As a result, virtually all users of the
format have specially defined a number of 9XX fields for local use.
There are many situations for this usage: a local system may simply
define 9XX tags, for internal use, that never leave the system, as
does LC; a distributor of records may define 9XX fields for data
that they need to send to customers; a utility may have 9XX fields
universally defined in a shared cataloging system that are used by
participants to send information back to the library with the
records (such data is not shared in system records); a utility may
have a block of 9XX fields that its users define as they desire and
into which they record information that is library specific. The
fields are heavily used in these ways for a great variety of data.
The CAN/MARC 9XX tags have existed in the format since the first
edition was published in 1973. Although tags and other content
designators containing a 9 have been reserved for local definition,
the CAN/MARC 9XX fields have always been part of the format and
have been recognized as a fundamental feature. For Canada, the 9XX
block is not considered local information; as noted above, these
fields support the bilingual character of the country and have been
distributed in NLC records since 1975.
An appendix to the harmonized format would recognize Canadian
bibliographic requirements; libraries receiving records from NLC
would continue to have the option of using the fields, stripping
them off before loading or converting them to another field (as
OCLC does at present).
The data that NLC records in the bibliographic 9XX fields is data
that also resides in the authority format records for the
entities. NLC carries the information in the bibliographic records
to assist systems that do not support authority record processing,
although ISM (which does have authority records) also find the
equivalency data convenient in the bibliographic records.
In the mid 1980s, as part of planning for bibliographic records
exchange in the NCCP program, an analysis was carried out of the
local fields used by OCLC, LC, and RLIN to see if there was any
commonality of data that was being input. Very little commonality
was found, the data being highly local and idiosyncratic to the
interactions of the utilities and customers.
This item drew many comments in the review of DP 93. Some of these
are quoted below:
Impact comments:
"Systems use various 9XX fields to house and communicate
information not expressly defined in the USMARC guidelines, but
needed for system performance and information transfer. A change
of this type would cause a fair amount of reengineering. There
would have to be conversions for each site that already a system
already using these fields."
"These appear to be elements in an authority records and not a
field in the bib format."
"We concur that it would be difficult to differentiate a 9XX field
used as equivalence field from a 9XX field traditionally used for
local fields (some of which have system significance to sites).
Once the records are mixed, algorithms to try to decide whether or
not equivalence is meant, so that display and authority validation
would work adequately, would be required."
"We are very concerned that the 9XX fields NOT be appropriated for
new purposes when so many libraries and especially vendors and
utilities have used them for local purposes for so many years."
"Major impact on our cataloging systems, on our export and on our
batch input software. We already support some of these local tags
for local systems. In order to handle the data correctly and
interpret which we care about keeping and which we don't care
about, we will need to know whose 9XX tag it is -- NLC, Brodart,
etc."
USMARC Advisory Group comments, July 1996:
Postpone decision until January 1997. Discussion brought out the
following:
- One suggestion was made to make a registry for domain specific
extensions to USMARC so that users could have a place to discover
meaning of 9XX data. Such a listing could be made available off
the MARC homepage with links to domain pages at domain sites.
Examples of a domain could be the NLC subscribers, the OCLC
customers for records, CONSER, the Follett customers for records.
- The issue here is not NLC's use of the 9XX fields but whether
they are to be considered defined in MARC. Defined, to USMARC
users, means that they must recognize the MARC definition and not
use the format-defined tags for any other data, in order to be
considered conforming to MARC. This is very important to system
vendors in answering RFPs, for example. The 9XX are widely used
and so it would need to be recognized that the NLC definitions are
not required for conformance.
- There are many internal, bilateral and unilateral uses of 9XX
fields in existence because of the format principle that those tags
are for local or domain-specific definition.
- Defining 9XX fields and carrying authority data in the
Bibliographic format goes against two of the USMARC principles as
approved by the Advisory Group.
- Canada stated that they only wanted their use of these fields
between Canadian libraries documented in the format as it has
always been in CAN/MARC.
USMARC Advisory Group comments, February 1997:
- The Canadian domain for the fields should be made clear.
- Establishment of local field registration for other donains,
accessible from the MARC homepage is strongly supported.
3. PROPOSED CHANGE
In the Bibliographic format:
- Option 1: Include an appendix in the official documentation
with the CAN/MARC 9XX fields specified in it.
- Option 2: Request that NLC publish the local 9XX fields in
customer documentation.
4. APPROVED CHANGE
Option 1 as stated.
Go to:
Library of Congress
Library of Congress Help Desk
(08/19/98)