ALCTS - Association of Library Collections & Technical Services

CC:DA/MARBI Rep/2008/1

January 12-13, 2008; rev.January 13, 2009

Report of the MARBI Representative to CC:DA
Midwinter Meeting 2008


Provided below are summaries of the proposals and discussion papers considered by MARBI at the ALA 2008 Midwinter Conference in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Complete text of the MARBI proposals and discussion papers summarized below is available from the MARC Advisory Committee web page: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/marcadvz.html.


Proposal No. 2008-01: Representation of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) System in MARC 21 formats

Source: Dewey editorial team, Deutsche Nationalbibliothek, LC, and OCLC

Summary: This paper proposes changes in the provisions for the DDC across the MARC 21 formats, in order to improve representation of classification information for the purposes of data communication, application, and retrieval.

Related MARBI Documents: Discussion Paper No. 2007-DP06 (June 2007)

MARBI action taken: There were 9 sub-elements of this paper addressing various MARC needs within the Dewey Decimal Classification community. All nine were approved, some with minor revisions.



Proposal No. 2008-02: Definition of field 542 for information related to copyright status in the MARC 21 bibliographic format

Source: California Digital Library

Summary: This paper proposes the addition of a new field 542 to carry information relating to copyright status determination. The information included are the primary ones used by Berne Convention signatories when making a copyright assessment of a work. The purpose of the data elements is to save the time of users when pertinent facts are known to the cataloging agency, and to avoid duplication of effort in the gathering of information on the part of the library or archive.

Related MARBI Documents: Discussion Paper No. 2006-DP04 (June 2006); Discussion Paper No. 2007-DP05 (May 2007)

MARBI action taken: Approved with fairly substantive revisions.



Proposal No. 2008-03: Definition of first indicator value in field 041 (Language code) of the MARC 21 bibliographic format

Source: British Library

Summary: This paper proposes defining a new first indicator value for "Unspecified/unknown" in field 041 (Language code) of the MARC 21 bibliographic format when there is no indication of whether a resource is a translation or includes a translation.

Related MARBI Documents: None

MARBI action taken: Approved with minor editorial revisions.



Discussion Paper No. 2008-DP01: Identifying headings that are appropriate as added entries, but are not used as bibliographic main entries

Source: ARLIS/NA, VRA

Summary: This discussion paper explores three alternatives to identifying headings that are appropriate as added entries, but are not used as bibliographic main entries.

Related MARBI Documents: Discussion Paper No. 2007-06/11 (May 2007)

MARBI action taken: This paper will come back as a proposal that will be expanded to include other similar headings that fall into this category. For example, uniform title headings of fairy tales such as Cinderella.



Discussion Paper No. 2008-DP02: Making field 440 (Series Statement/Added Entry--Title) obsolete in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format

Source: Program for Cooperative Cataloging

Summary: This paper suggests making field 440 obsolete in favour of using 490 (Series Statement) and the 8XX Series added entry fields. This would simplify practice and the need for systems to look multiple places in the records for the authorized series heading.

Related MARBI Documents: None

MARBI action taken: This paper will come back as a Proposal, or series of proposals.



Discussion Paper No. 2008-DP03: Definition of subfield $3 for recording information associated with series added entry fields (800-830) in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format

Source: CONSER

Summary: This paper discusses the need for indicating the part of a series, via date or volume information to which a particular responsible body or title was applicable to a resource. It suggests defining subfield $3 (Materials specified) to designate the part of the resource to which the information applies in the 8XX series fields.

Related MARBI Documents: None

MARBI action taken: MARBI would like this Discussion Paper to come back as a proposal or series of proposals expanded beyond the needs of the current paper, which specifically addresses the serials community. Both the Map and Sound Recording communities expressed interest in this capability. MARBI would also like to see the Proposal address more than just the 8XX block of MARC fields.



Discussion Paper No.: 2008-DP04: Encoding RDA, Resource Description and Access data in MARC 21

Source: Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA (JSC)

Summary: This paper discusses the issues related to encoding RDA using MARC 21. JSC is presenting these issues for consideration and direction regarding what changes may be required to MARC 21 Bibliographic and Authority formats to encode RDA data.

Related MARBI Documents: None

MARBI action taken: MARBI was pleased to receive this update on the current directions envisioned for encoding RDA within MARC 21. As this was only a Discussion Paper, MARBI tried to offer broad guidance and direction to the JSC for developing the proposal(s) MARBI will see at ALA Annual.

In so doing, MARBI tried to offer a principled approach.

Guiding Principle No. 1: Granularity is Good!

As a general principle, MARBI wants to accommodate each of the RDA data elements necessary to encode RDA records in MARC. Those RDA data elements that currently have a logical location in MARC should be encoded there, but existing MARC 21 elements will be redefined, or tweaked, simply to accommodate RDA. Instead, where necessary, MARBI will define new MARC fields, subfields, and values to encode all necessary RDA data elements.

By providing for the encoding of all necessary RDA data elements, MARBI believes that individual user communities and libraries will be able to determine the best possible RDA-based catalog and record displays for users.

Historically many ILMS Systems have failed to recognize the distinction between data encoding and data display, but that is an implementation issue.




Everett Allgood,
MARBI Representative to CC:DA