J. McRee Elrod wrote:
> }pbk, hbk, large print ed., CD, score, video, DVD etc.
> There is no one MARC21 subfield which would normally contain all these
> The terms "pbk" and "hbk" would be in an 020 qualification; "large
> print" would be in 245$h[text (large print)]; "CD" and "DVD" are now
> allowed as SMDs in 300$a; "video" is the first half of 245$h[video
> recording]; "score" is a 300$a SMD.
> If you want just one field to contain all these terms, possibilities
> include 59X or 69X. They are not standard terms for a 655. Your
> terms are also not mutually exclusive, e.g., a DVD can be (and usual
> is) a video (perhaps you mean VHS?).
Another possibility would be to define a logal MARC tag for this
information. Since all tag and subfield values with 9 are "local"
(though systems such as OCLC have some defined for their own systems and
their members use them, and others often follow suit for consistency) --
apart from 490 you might use 309; when it comes to exporting records or
migrating to a new system, the simpler the mechanism you use, the
better. Another possibility might be to define subfield 9 in 300; the
same considerations apply.
> You could consider using 300$f Type of unit. This is normally used
> for the container, e.g., "box", but using it would most closely
> resemble your present practice, the conversion from 300$p to 300$f
> could be automated, and you would only have one subfield to map and
However using a standard subfield in a nonstandard way could leave you
with problems in future.
But in your local catalogue you may, of course, do what you want!
The scatter of this kind of format information in MARC 21, and the less
than satisfactory treatment in AACR2, is a longstanding problem in
designing decent OPAC displays that present users with the information
they want in a plain and consistent form.
Joint Theological Library
Parkville, Victoria, Australia
[log in to unmask]