Henry Wiebe said on Autocat:

>Having worked at an academic library consortium as well as a public
>library, I've yet to use an ILS that actually makes use of the fixed
>field codes ...

We make use of a few inhouse, e.g., monographs vs. serials, date one,
and print vs. electronic.  But many fixed fields lack any real
application either inhouse or in the OPACs we support.

I suspect it is the complex fixed fields which make MARC unacceptable
outside the library community.  They originated when variable field
data was more difficult to access.  People complain about "card
practices" in MARC (most of which I like :-{)} ), but say little about
earlier system requirements still reflected in MARC.  

If we had simplified fixed fields, and standardized them across
formats,  I suspect Dublin Core would not have reared its ugly head.

Thanks for your comments Henry.  I'm sending to the MARC list.


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