LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for BIBFRAME Archives


BIBFRAME Archives

BIBFRAME Archives


BIBFRAME@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME  May 2013

BIBFRAME May 2013

Subject:

Re: Instance of ISBNs in MARC records

From:

Hal Cain <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 23 May 2013 00:51:38 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (98 lines)

The figures are interesting.  But if a tabulation of occurrences of ISBN is 
being used to indicate something, it's just as well to be aware of what they 
designate and how they may be related.  Since the qualifying text which may 
be recorded in MARC in association with the number is free text, it's 
difficult to use it as a basis for argument: I have read many a MARC record 
in which an ISBN for a multipart set was not qualified (in any way) with 
that information, and likewise many a record where ISBNs for constituent 
volumes had nothing to identify which parts the numbers had been assigned 
to; and sometimes nothing to show which number was assigned to hardback or 
paperback (or other special) binding.

But there's some history which also plays a part in helping us understand.

The standard book numbering movement got off the ground with a 9-digit 
number: 8 digits plus a check digit.  A few years later it became universal, 
and a tenth digit was prefixed: happily the English-language publisher group 
was assigned 0 as prefix, so the verification algorithm using the check 
digit remained valid. More recently ISBN has been merged into broader prduct 
numbering with additional prefix (mostly 978) added, and this time the 
verification of the check digit has to change.

The point is that, in terms of what appears on an item (and in the 
bibliograhic record), the 9-digit SBN, the 10-digit ISBN and the 13-digit 
ISBN may be functionally, if not formally, identical.  They can all be 
converted from one form to another -- indeed, OCLC has algorithmically 
created in WorldCat 13-digit equivalents for existing 10-digit numbers, 
irrespective of whether the physical items carry numbers in 10- or 13-digit 
format.

A count of the number occurrences, as a resource for sketching a framework 
or making a preliminary assessment of its validity, surely ought to account 
for these equivalences?  They are, after all, the same identifier encased in 
different recognition and validation frameworks: they don't designate 
different bibliographic objects.

Hal Cain
Melbourne, Australia
[log in to unmask]

On Wed, 22 May 2013 11:14:06 +0000, Shlomo Sanders 
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>I don't think there is a need.
>Number with zero don't change.
>Number with one don't change.
>Some of those with two may actually be one.
>More than 2 is definitely more than 1.
>
>Thanks,
>Shlomo
>
>Sent from my iPad
>
>On May 21, 2013, at 21:23, "Tennant,Roy" 
<[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
>Yes. The program is simply counting the number of 020 $a's it finds in
>each record. If necessary, it could be altered to count the two kinds
>separately.
>Roy
>
>On 5/21/13 5/21/13 � 2:28 AM, "Shlomo Sanders"
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> 
wrote:
>
>Are you counting 10 digit and 13 digit as 2 different ISBNs?
>
>Thanks,
>Shlomo
>
>Experience the all-new, singing and dancing interactive Primo brochure
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tennant,Roy
>Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 22:33
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Instance of ISBNs in MARC records
>
>Corrected figures. The main difference is that the position of single
>instances and 4 instances switched.
>
>NO. of Recs ISBNs Percent
>
>230444194  0 77.71%
>55668178  2 18.77%
>4766652  1  1.61%
>3708352  4  1.25%
> 616623  3  0.21%
> 411230  6  0.14%
> 125715  8  0.04%
>  65796  5  0.02%
>  45304 10  0.02%
>  30155 12    0.01%
>
>Roy

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
July 2011
June 2011

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager