 |
 |
Amy: Before you make a decision about what technique to use, take a look at MARBI discussion paper 116, available at: http://lcweb.loc.gov/marc/marbi/dp/dp116.html It describes a technique that will allow linking at the appropriate level, and if your vendor can support even part of it, should help you maintain reasonable records for your bound-withs. Even if your vendor doesn't support this technique (ours doesn't, though they promised at the MARBI meeting at which this was discussed that they would), you can use notes to give you some short-term functionality, and browbeat your vendor for the long-term solution. At Cornell we set up a procedure for adding the notes and making the links (which aren't functional yet): http://www.library.cornell.edu/voyager/Holdings/BoundWith.html At the very least, doing it this way won't compromise your ability to move your data (and we know that will happen again!). Diane Hillmann Cornell University >Our library is beginning to create MARC Holding records for all materials, >including monographs. When we purchased the software segment to do this, >our vendor told us that we could tie together bibliographic records for >bound-withs and analytics by repeating the 004 control field. But the MARC >documentation for Holdings Data says that the 004 field is not repeatable. > >If anyone can give me some ideas for dealing with these bound-withs without >going against the MARC standard, I would appreciate it very much. > >Thanks, > > > >Amy Stults >Library, Technical Services >Abilene Christian University >ACU Box 29208 >Abilene, Texas 79699 >915-674-2733 >[log in to unmask]