>RLG's proposal makes the case for marking private information in fields
>such as the 541 and the 561 so that it can be masked within the context
>of a union catalog.

It would seem to me that this is *totally* a matter between the local
library and its systems vendor and/or bibliographic utility, and not
properly the concern of MARBI at all.  We have customers who what 362
suppressed in their book catalogues because it is mistaken as holdings
for example.  That would seem to me to be between us the the library.
The same would apply to what fields are shown in an OPAC MARC display,
whether in a local or union catalogue.

   __       __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([log in to unmask])
  {__  |   /     Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________