The Library of Congress >> Especially for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards

HOME >> MARC Development >> Discussion Paper List

MARC DISCUSSION PAPER NO. 2006-DP05

DATE: December 28, 2005
REVISED:

NAME: Indicating coverage dates for indexes in the MARC 21 Holdings Format

SOURCE: Library of Congress

SUMMARY: This paper discusses the need for index coverage dates in addition to issuing dates in MARC 21 holdings field 865. The development of ONIX for Serials, Serial Release Notice will necessitate mapping from SRN to MARC 21 because publishers will be communicating this information. SRN is more granular in its distinctions of date types for indexes and includes both coverage and issuing dates, while MARC 21 does not.

KEYWORDS: Field 865; Enumeration and Chronology--Indexes; ONIX for Serials; Serial Release Notice

RELATED: 2006-05 (Jan. 2006)

STATUS/COMMENTS:

12/28/05 - Made available to the MARC 21 community for discussion.

01/22/06 - Results of the MARC Advisory Committee discussion - The participants felt that there was a need to keep issue and coverage dates separately. A proposal will be presented at the next meeting for issue dates. Subfield $r in field 865 could be used.

Discussion Paper No. 2006-DP05: Indicating coverage dates for indexes

The ONIX (Online Information Exchange) family of standards were intended for communicating rich product information about books and other related material. Initially it was developed through the efforts of book publishers and other stakeholders in the book industry, especially for communicating information between publishers and online booksellers. Recently ONIX for Serials was developed as a similar standard for serials by a joint committee under the sponsorship of EDItEUR (the developer of ONIX) and NISO (National Information Standards Organization).

The NISO/EDItEUR Joint Working Party for the Exchange of Serials Subscription Information (JWP) has developed a specification and is experimenting in pilot projects to demonstrate the feasibility of using ONIX for Serials as an exchange format for serials subscription and holdings information. More information about the effort is detailed in Proposal No. 2006-05 (Changes to holdings data fields to accommodate ONIX for Serials in the MARC 21 Holdings Format). Since it is likely that holdings and coverage information supplied in ONIX messages will be loaded into MARC-based library systems it is desirable for elements in ONIX to have MARC equivalents so that the data is not lost. This paper explores the possibility of dates of coverage of indexes, which is an element in ONIX but not mappable currently to a distinct MARC 21 holdings element.

2 DISCUSSION

2.1. Index coverage dates

The MARC 21 Holdings Format has extensive information on enumeration and chronology as they appear on bibliographic items. The captions and pattern information is included in parsed form in fields 853-855 and the data detailing enumeration and chronology in fields 863-865. There are special fields (855/865) for recording such information about indexes in particular, since there are often peculiarities in their publishing patterns so that they do not correspond with the enumeration and chronology of the basic bibliographic unit. When indexes are not cataloged separately, the paired fields 855 and 865 are used to record holdings information of the index related to the basic bibliographic unit. When indexes are cataloged separately, enumeration and chronology is given in fields 853/863 in the holdings record.

Like the other Enumeration and chronology fields, field 865 allows for detailed parsing of this information in subfields which are paired with caption subfields. Chronology information is included in subfields $i through $m, indicating the date(s) used by the publisher to help identify it and/or indicate when it was issued. The MARC 21 holdings format states that “Subfields $i-$m contain the hierarchical levels of chronology that either appear on an item or that are used by the reporting organization to record the receipt of an item.” Note that the dates on bibliographic items have generally been considered issuing dates.

In MARC holdings, there is not a discrete data element for coverage dates, although this information may be useful bibliographically. Often the publication date may be later than the coverage date of the index, and it is currently not possible to record both in field 865. Certainly indexes are most useful in the context of the range of dates associated with the basic bibliographic unit they cover. There is a note in the definition of chronology in the glossary of Z39.71, Holdings Statements for Bibliographic Items which says: “Note: the chronology may reflect the date of coverage, publication, copyright, or printing”, but in MARC holdings there is no way to differentiate different types of dates recorded; they are generally assumed to be issuing dates. In section 5.5.5.2 of Z39.71 it states that:

“When more than one type of date is present on the bibliographic item, select the date from the following preferred dates, in this order:
Date of coverage
Date of publication
Date of copyright
Date of printing”

MARC 21 practice seems to be to record the date on the piece associated with the type of chronology specified in field 853-855, generally issuing date.

The Serial Release Notice (SRN) of ONIX for Serials includes tags for enumeration. These include <indexEnumeration> with subelements <SeriesTitle>, <IndexedSequence>, and <indexedPeriod>. SeriesTitle corresponds with MARC 21 field 865 subfield $o (Title of unit), IndexedSequence corresponds with 865$a-$h, and <IndexedPeriod> is the range of dates covered. Chronology subfields equivalent to MARC 21 865 subfields $i-$m in SRN are subelements of the tag <NominalDate>. Thus, in ONIX there are distinct elements provided for coverage date (IndexedPeriod) and issuing date (NominalDate). If an SRN for a title were communicated to a MARC system there would be no place to put both of these dates.

Two examples of serials with differing issuing dates and coverage (with links to copies of title pages) are:

Oceanic abstracts (ISSN 0093-6901)
Meteorological and geoastrophysical abstracts (ISSN 1066-2707)

2.2. Available subfields

It is desirable to be able to map SRN index coverage dates to an element in the MARC 21 Holdings Format. However, most of the subfields in field 865 are already defined, although the following are available: $r, $u, $v, $y. Enumeration and chronology subfields are used in conjunction with subfields in fields 853-855 to generate a holdings statement. Thus, it may be confusing to define subfields in 865 that exist with another meaning in field 855. Subfields $u, $v, and $y are already defined in fields 853-855, so the only one available in both field blocks is $r. Note that Proposal No. 2006-05 proposes the addition of $r in fields 853-855 for language of captions.

Field 865 is defined as follows:

Indicator 1 - Field encoding level
Indicator 2 - Form of holdings
Subfields
$a - First level of enumeration (NR)
$b - Second level of enumeration (NR)
$c - Third level of enumeration (NR)
$d - Fourth level of enumeration (NR)
$e - Fifth level of enumeration (NR)
$f - Sixth level of enumeration (NR)
$g - Alternative numbering scheme, first level of enumeration (NR)
$h - Alternative numbering scheme, second level of enumeration (NR)
$i - First level of chronology (NR)
$j - Second level of chronology (NR)
$k - Third level of chronology (NR)
$l - Fourth level of chronology (NR)
$m - Alternative numbering scheme, chronology (NR)
$n - Converted Gregorian year (NR)
$o - Title of index (NR)
$p - Piece designation (NR)
$q - Piece physical condition (NR)
$s - Copyright article-fee code (R)
$t - Copy number (NR)
$w - Break indicator (NR
$x - Nonpublic note (R)
$z - Public note (R)
$6 - Linkage (NR)
$8 - Field link and sequence number (NR)

Field 855 is defined as follows:

Indicator 1: undefined
Indicator 2: undefined
Subfields
$a - First level of enumeration (NR)
$b - Second level of enumeration (NR)
$c - Third level of enumeration (NR)
$d - Fourth level of enumeration (NR)
$e - Fifth level of enumeration (NR)
$f - Sixth level of enumeration (NR)
$g - Alternative numbering scheme, first level of enumeration (NR)
$h - Alternative numbering scheme, second level of enumeration (NR)
$i - First level of chronology (NR)
$j - Second level of chronology (NR)
$k - Third level of chronology (NR)
$l - Fourth level of chronology (NR)
$m - Alternative numbering scheme, chronology (NR)
$n - Pattern note (NR)
$o - Type of index (NR)
$p - Number of pieces per issuance (NR)
$t - Copy (NR)
$u - Bibliographic units per next higher level (R)
$v - Numbering continuity (R)
$w - Frequency (NR)
$x - Calendar change (NR)
$y - Regularity pattern (R)
$z - Numbering scheme (R)
$3 - Materials specified (NR)
$6 - Linkage (NR)
$8 - Field link and sequence number (NR)

3 QUESTIONS

3.1. Is there a need to differentiate between issuing/publication and coverage dates encoded in 865$i-m? Is it a problem if ONIX SRN data on index coverage dates is lost if specific elements are not provided?

3.2. Are any institutions currently recording coverage rather than issuing date in field 865?

3.3. If there is a need for a separate data element for index coverage date, how might this be accommodated in the format, since there are few data elements available in field 865. Could one of the undefined subfields be used even if defined differently in field 855? Does the same subfield need to be defined in field 863, since indexes cataloged separately use 853/863 to record holdings?

HOME >> MARC Development >> Discussion Paper List