Source: CONSER Standard Record-MARC Working Group

Summary:A new note field 883 is proposed to include cataloger working notes on sources of information, questionable or prospective changes, etc.

Related MARBI Documents: Discussion Paper No. 2009-DP02 (December 19, 2008)

Discussion: Much of the discussion focused on a broader need for this field by other cataloging communities beyond Continuing Resources. As those communities clarify their needs and bring them forward, this field may require additional revision.

MARBI action taken: Following extensive discussion, this proposal was amended as: A repeatable 588 field called “Source of Description Note” containing subfields $a, $5, $6, and $8.
Given these amendments and revisions, the proposal was approved unanimously.

Source: Online Audiovisual Catalogers, Cataloging Policy Committee

Summary: This paper proposes broadening the use of field 257 (Country of producing entity for archival films) of the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format to include non-archival materials by renaming it: Country of producing entity. It also proposes making field 257 and its subfield $a repeatable. Additionally, it recommends adding subfield $2 (Source) to indicate a controlled list of terms from which information has been taken.

Related MARBI Documents: Discussion Paper No. 2009-DP03 (January 9, 2009)

MARBI action taken: This proposal was approved with amendments and editorial revisions.

Source: Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC), OCLC

Summary: The case is made to make the definition of 008/39 (Cataloging source) obsolete in the MARC Bibliographic Format as the data is available in a better form in field 040 and field 042.

Related MARBI Documents: None

Discussion: OCLC, LC, and others reported that the information this MARC 21 byte is intended to encode is available in more reliable forms elsewhere in the Bibliographic record ( e.g., 040 subfield $c and the presence of an 042 field, etc.)

MARBI action taken: This Discussion Paper will come back as a Proposal at Midwinter.

Source: Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC), Provider-Neutral E-Monograph Record Task Group

Summary: This paper proposes adding new codes in character positions 008/23 and 008/29 (Form of item) for online and direct access electronic resources. It also presents three options for what should be done with the existing code for “electronic” in those positions.

Related MARBI Documents: MARC Proposal No. 97-1 (December 15, 1996); MARC Proposal No. 2009-01/2 (January 9, 2009)

Discussion: Preference was stated for Option 1 in the Discussion Paper. It should also be clear that the focus of these codes will be for catalogs pursuing a Separate Record Approach rather than consolidating Manifestations upon a single bibliographic description.

MARBI action taken: This Discussion Paper will come back as a Proposal at Midwinter.

Source: Biblioteca Nacional de España (National Library of Spain)

Summary: This paper proposes adding codes for four important musical forms of composition in field 008 (Fixed length data elements - Music) character positions 18-19 (Form of composition). The codes can also be used in field 047 (Form of musical composition) subfield $a.

Related MARBI Documents: None

MARBI action taken: Approved (with editorial revisions) for both the 008/18-19 bytes, and the 047 MARC 21 Bibliographic field.

Source:National Library of Spain

Summary: This paper suggests defining subfield $3 (Materials specified) to designate the part of the resource to which the information applies in field 534 (Original Version Note).

Related MARBI Documents: None

MARBI action taken: Approved

Source: RDA/MARC Working Group

Summary: RDA specifies relationship designators for relationships between names and between resources. The $i subfield is proposed for those designators in the primary linking fields, the 700-730 and the 76X-78X.

Related MARBI Documents: Discussion Paper No. 2009-DP01/2 (January 13, 2009)

Discussion: The proposal was to add subfield $i (Reference instruction phrase) to fields X00, X10, X11, X30, and 760-787 in the Bibliographic format; to add subfield $i to fields 5XX in the Authorities format, to add subfield $4 (relator code) to fields 760-787 in the Bibliographic format; and to redefine field 787 as "Other Relationship Entry) in the Bibliographic format.
In discussion of the proposal, MARBI also decided to add a new code to $w byte 0 in the Authorities format. This is the element that essentially says to use the contents of subfield $i as display text. A separate code will indicate that these $i subfields contain relationship designators.

MARBI action taken: Approved, with significant revisions.

Source: RDA/MARC Working Group

Summary: This paper proposes making subfield $x (ISSN) in field 490 repeatable in order to accommodate the RDA instruction to record ISSN for both the series and the subseries.

Related MARBI Documents: None

Discussion: The proposal was to make subfield $x (ISSN) in field 490 of the Bibliographic format repeatable. It was noted that this proposal relies on the sequence of subfields to indicate whether the ISSN applies to the main series or the subseries. Although there is a risk involved, this will not be the first time MARC has relied on sequence to provide meaning.

MARBI action taken: Approved.

Source: RDA/MARC Working Group

Summary: This paper proposes to establish new coded values for several carriers in the 007/01 (Specific material designation) position of the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format to accommodate carriers added to RDA. Other carrier description vocabularies are also discussed.

Related MARBI Documents: Discussion Paper No. 2009-01/2 (January 9, 2009)

Discussion: The new codes were for new carrier types that were added to RDA at the March 2009 JSC meeting.

MARBI action taken: Approved.

Source: RDA/MARC Working Group

Summary: This paper discusses use of a new subfield $1 (Controlled value URI), defined across the formats and fields, for encoding URI for controlled values in MARC records, with an alternate technique using attributes for MARCXML.

Related MARBI Documents: Discussion Paper No.2009-DP01/1 (December 19, 2008)

Discussion: The proposal was to add subfield $1 to all fields in the MARC 21 Bibliographic and Authority formats. The proposal was to support the recording of a URI instead of, or in addition to, the content of a controlled element. It was noted that some of the possible situations (e.g., the URI represents more than one but not all subfields in the field) may be too complex to encode in classic (ISO 2709) MARC and might have to be limited to XMLMARC encodings. MARBI asked LC to prepare a Discussion Paper on possible divergence between the two versions of MARC 21.

In the meantime, another possible technique to encode URIs via MARC 21was suggested: the use of parallel fields, as is done for alternative scripts in parallel 880 fields. In the parallel field (881?) the parts of the field that are represented by URI's would be recorded using subfield $1, with any remaining subfields recording the text strings; the 881 would be linked to the parallel field using subfield $6 as is done in 880.

It is likely that both options will be explored at the Boston Midwinter Conference. This may still be a Discussion Paper, but the objective will be to give developers a sense of direction in order to allow them to explore the use of URIs in this way.

MARBI action taken: This paper will come back as a proposal at Midwinter presenting two Options: the subfield $1 (one) option presented in this Discussion Paper, and a possible 88X linking field option to encode these URIs similar to how 880 linked fields for vernacular scripts are currently used.

Source: RDA/MARC Working Group

Summary: This discussion paper explores issues of granularity in recording date and place of capture in the MARC21 Bibliographic Formats.

Related MARBI Documents: Discussion Paper No.2008-DP04 (December 14, 2007); MARC Proposal No. 2008-05/1 (June 12, 2008)

Discussion: DP 2009-DP06/2 suggests adding several subfields to fields 033 (Date/Time and Place of an Event) and 518 (Date/Time and Place of an Event Note). Some of these subfields would allow the RDA elements Date of Capture and Place of Capture to be distinguished.

MARBI action taken: This Discussion Paper will come back as a Proposal at Midwinter. MARBI provided guidance regarding additional elements the Proposal may include.

Source: RDA/MARC Working Group

Summary: This paper suggests new data elements in the MARC 21 Bibliographic and Authority Formats in order to support RDA detail with respect to works and expressions.

Related MARBI Documents: Discussion Paper No. 2008-DP04 (December 14, 2007); MARC Proposal No. 2008-05/1 (June 12, 2008); Discussion Paper No. 2008-DP05/2 (June 12, 2008); MARC Proposal No. 2009-01/1 (January 9, 2009); MARC 21 Format 2009 Changes to Accommodate RDA (Draft) (June 23, 2009)

Discussion: The suggestion was to add new MARC fields/subfields for a number of RDA elements that might be included in Work and Expression records separate from their inclusion in access points. There was general agreement.

These are to be added to both the MARC 21 Bibliographic and Authority formats on the grounds that we are still deciding which format to use for Work and Expression descriptions. It was decided that the same fields should be used in both formats and that therefore, the 3XX block was preferable to the 62X block. This will change the tags for a number of the new fields approved in January (i.e., the 62X block of fields approved in Denver will become 37X fields).

Finally, it was decided that there should also be proposals to add new MARC fields for some of the attributes of person, family, and corporate body that are not yet included in the MARC 21 Authorities format.

MARBI action taken: Discussion Paper will come back as a Proposal at Midwinter.