On Thu, 24 Nov 2005, Mike Taylor wrote:

> > Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 20:23:24 -0000
> > From: "Matthew J. Dovey" <[log in to unmask]>
> > 
> >>> I think a delimier *is* needed between the MARC tag and the
> >>> subfield though just to avoid confusion over say numeric subfield
> >>> names e.g.
> >>> 
> >>> marc.2451
> >>> 
> >>> Say marc.245$1 marc245$a for instance?
> 
> Yes, you may be right.  Personally, I would be equally happy with any
> of the three alternative we've mentioned, or the use of an underscore:
> 
> 	marc.245a
> 	marc.245$a
> 	marc.245.a
> 	marc.245_a
> 
> But I think it's important that we pick one of these forms and stick
> with it.  I would welcome comments from those who use MARC more
> extensively.

How about marc.245$a  or
          marc.856i2       (to designate e.g., second indicator)?

Larry

------------------------------------------------------------
Larry E. Dixson                    Internet:    [log in to unmask]
Network Development and MARC
   Standards Office, LA327
Library of Congress                Telephone: (202) 707-5807
Washington, D.C.  20540-4402       Fax:       (202) 707-0115