How useful would that information be in either case?  If you have a record that uses more than one convention, wouldn't you have to know which elements follow which convention?  Otherwise, the information that more than one convention was used is not very helpful.  Shouldn't a cataloger choose a convention to follow and more or less stick to it?  There will always be extensions and variations, as there always have been.
 
But if we must use multiple codes, it seems better to make the subfield repeatable than to create an endless series of combination codes.
 
_____________________________________________
 
John Hostage                  Authorities Librarian
Langdell Hall                 [log in to unmask]
Harvard Law School Library    (617) 495-3974 (voice)
Cambridge, MA 02138           (617) 496-4409 (fax)
http://www.law.harvard.edu/library/


________________________________

From: MARC on behalf of Culbertson, Rebecca
Sent: Mon 2010-02-01 18:54
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: 040 subfield e



Colleagues--

At the present time the 040 subfield "e" is not repeatable.  Therefore
what is likely to happen when more than one description convention needs
to be used--e.g., both "rda" and "dcrmb" are applicable?

Is it more likely that the subfield will become repeatable?  Or that
there will need to be another convention, such as "dcrmbrda"


Rebecca Culbertson

Shared Cataloging Program
California Digital Library
Metadata Services Department
University of California, San Diego
La Jolla, California 92093-0175
(858) 822-6415 (Phone)
(858) 822-0349 (Fax)
"If at first you don't succeed, change the rules"