Print

Print


Hi Dan,

That looks like an error. There is no 242 $i in MARC or in the MARC mapping. I'm not sure how/when it slipped in the stylesheet. I will delete it today.

Thanks, Tracy

>>> Dan Scott <[log in to unmask]> 3/14/2009 11:07 AM >>>
2009/3/13 Tracy Neckar Meehleib <[log in to unmask]>:
> Hi All,
>
> We revised the MARC to MODS 3.3 mapping and stylesheet to include a mapping and conversion for MARC field 648:
>
> Revision 1.27 - Mapped MARC field 648 to MODS <subject>
> MARC to MODS 3.3 Mapping <http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/mods-mapping.html>
> MARC to MODS 3.3 Stylesheet <http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/MARC21slim2MODS3-3.xsl>

Compared to the previous version of the MARC to MODS 3.3 stylesheet
that we have in the Evergreen source code repository, I noticed an
addition in revision 1.27 of a mapping for 242 $i to a displayLabel
attribute. I don't see this  particular mapping mentioned in
http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/mods-mapping.html - was this an
intended addition? It looks like it might have snuck in from the draft
MODS3.4 mappings (http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/changes-3-4.html).

As an aside, is there a publicly visible version control repository
for these files? I realized after the new stylesheet came out that
there was no easy way to confirm that our local repository's copy
hadn't been locally altered to account for the difference in the 242
$i mapping.

FYI, here's the pertinent changeset for the MODS3.3 XSL 1.26 -> 1.27
bump in the Evergreen repository:
http://svn.open-ils.org/trac/ILS/changeset/12520 

-- 
Dan Scott
Laurentian University