So redefine ISO 2709. Why are we letting ISO 2709 drive the conversation?
On Sep 25, 2011, at 3:16 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
> Oops, hit the wrong button before finishing....
> Quoting "J. McRee Elrod" <[log in to unmask]>:
>> One difficulty with two letter subfield codes would be telling the
>> difference between a two letter code, and a one latter code followed
>> by a lower case data element, e.g., "e-Book". A one letter code with
>> punctuation might work better, e.g., 245 =$b and :$b.
> The way ISO 2709 works, all subfield codes must be of the same length, so you couldn't mix 1-character and 2-character codes in the same record. You know what the length of the subfield code is because that is in the Leader (even though most systems today ignore it since so far all implementations use one-character codes).
> Karen Coyle
> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
> ph: 1-510-540-7596
> m: 1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet
William F. Maag Library
Youngstown State University
[log in to unmask]
""For he is the Kwisatz Haderach..."