DISCUSSION PAPER NO: 2003-DP03

DATE: Dec. 16, 2002
REVISED:

NAME: Adding Field 024 (Other Standard Identifier) to the MARC 21 Authority Format

SOURCE: OCLC

SUMMARY: This paper discusses adding Field 024 (Other Standard Identifier) to the MARC 21 Authority Format to allow for recording standard identifiers relevant to the entity described in the authority record.

KEYWORDS: Field 024 (AD); Other Standard Identifier (AD); Identifier (AD)

RELATED:

STATUS/COMMENTS:
12/16/02 -- Made available to the MARC 21 community for discussion.

1/25/03 - Results of the MARC Advisory Committee discussion - Participants generally agreed that field 024 should be added to the authority format to record work and expression level identifiers. It may especially be needed when the rules for creating authority records for works and expressions change as the community begins to integrate the FRBR model into its cataloging practices. There was a lot of discussion about whether the indicator values in field 024 of the authority format should match those in the bibliographic format. Defining only subfield $2 (Source of number or code) in the authority field was supported by several participants because the indicator values from the bibliographic format are defined mostly for manifestation level identifiers. Participants also felt that the display of work and expression level identifiers on bibliographic items should be explored. A proposal to define a field in the authority format will be presented during the annual 2003 meeting. It will explore whether the ISTC must be displayed on the item and issues with linking to another record.

Discussion Paper No. 2003-DP03: Adding Field 024 (Other Standard Identifier) to the MARC 21 Authority Format

1. INTRODUCTION

This paper proposes the addition of Field 024 (Other Standard Identifier) to the MARC 21 Authority Format. This would allow for the recording of standard identifiers relevant to what is identified in the 1XX field in the authority record. There are a number of efforts to develop standard identifiers for works as well as for people and organizations, and as they are implemented, there will be a need to record them in authority records. In addition, there are efforts to establish authority records for "trademarks", particularly in Europe. Examples are the International Standard Text Code (ISTC), International Standard Audiovisual Number (ISAN), International Standard Musical Work Code (ISWC), International Standard Recording Code (ISRC), and the International Standard Authority Data Number (ISADN).

2. DISCUSSION

2.1. Authority records as identifiers

With the increasing proliferation of both nondigital and digital materials, there are efforts in standards organizations to uniquely identify both individual works or expressions as well as persons and organizations. In MARC, these entities are represented by authority records, which serve the function of providing a controlled form of name which can then be used in bibliographic records as a collocation device. Authority records with uniform titles (Field 130 Heading - Uniform Title) identify unique individual works or expressions using established headings constructed according to generally accepted cataloging and thesaurus-building rules.

2.2 Standards developed by ISO TC46/SC9

Subcommittee TC 46/SC 9 of the ISO (International Organization for Standardization) has been developing standards for the identification and description of a variety of information resources using alphanumeric codes. These codes are intended for use by a variety of organizations, including libraries and archives and will allow resources to be uniquely identified. A major function of these identifiers is to assist in tracking rights to the intellectual content of resources. Some of the standards have already been approved; others remain under development.

Some of the standards include:*

2.3 Application of ISO TC 46/SC 9 standards to authority records

In terms of the Functional Requirements of Bibliographic Records (FRBR), bibliographic records are generally created for bibliographic resources at the level of manifestation, while authority records for uniform titles are considered work or expression level. In the case of ISTC, the draft standard is not clear whether it is for work or expression because of the terminology used, but recent discussion has implied that it could be either. These work/expression identifiers may be recorded in the bibliographic record if desired, but recording them in the authority record is also desirable.

In the bibliographic format, field 024 (Other Standard Identifier) would be an appropriate field in which to record this information, with the source of the identifier recorded in subfield $2. The Library of Congress would define additional codes to accommodate the new identifiers (e.g. istc, iswc, isadn, etc.). The field would need to be defined in authority records in order to record them there as well.

2.4 Definition of field 024

2.4.1 Definition in the bibliographic format

Field 024 is defined as follows in the bibliographic format:

024 Other Standard Identifier (R)

2.4.2 Definition in the authority format

If defined in the authority format not all content designators are needed. The indicator values are for manifestation level identifiers except for the International Standard Recording Code (ISRC), which is a work level identifier. Thus values 1-4 are not appropriate in an authority record, which includes entities at the work or expression levels. The second indicator is also irrelevant to an authority record.

The field definition and scope would need to be modified to apply to authority records. The following is suggested:

This field contains a standard number or code associated with a heading which cannot be accommodated in another field (i.e., field 020 (International Standard Book Number), 022 (International Standard Serial Number)). The type of standard number or code is identified in the first indicator position.

The same subfield codes in the bibliographic format may also be needed in the authority format. Although $c (Terms of availability) includes information about the manifestation, it also may include parenthetical qualifying information so it should be included for authority records.

Field 024 could be defined in the MARC 21 Authority Format as follows:

024 Other Standard Identifier (R)

The field would need to be repeatable, as it is in the bibliographic format, to allow for recording different types of identifiers, whose source is identified in $2.

An example of the use of field 024 in an authority record is as follows:

010 ## no 98012500
024 7# $a [ISTC number/code] $2 istc
100 10 $a Eliot, George, $d 1819-1880. $t Daniel Deronda

4. Questions

4.1. How might this field be applied in authority records for specific types of materials (e.g. musical works, serials, etc.)? What sort of guidelines will be needed?

4.2. What are the implications of the definition of this field on institutional policies concerning creation of authority records? For instance, LC currently does not create authority records for works/expressions unless a reference is required. Is it likely that these practices will change as we work through integrating the FRBR model into cataloging?

4.3. Is it preferable to align the indicator value 0 for ISRC with the field in the bibliographic format or to have all code sources indicated in $2?

4.4. Should field 024 in the Authority format be defined the same as in the bibliographic format, even though some of the indicators do not apply at the work/expression level represented by the authority record?

• List of Discussion Papers
• MARC Home Page
• Library of Congress Home Page