An interesting variant, if it's easy to run: what are the counts using distinct work-sets instead of records?
Let me do this again (from scratch, even). The following are the number of records that have the listed elements, out of 289,294,984 records processed, as of 1 January 2013 in WorldCat:
700 $4: 14,229,291 or 4.92% of the total
700 $e: 9,904,536 or 3.42% of the total
On 1/18/13 1/18/13 • 10:33 AM, "Ross Singer" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
On Jan 18, 2013, at 1:11 PM, "Godsey-Bell, Connie F. (LNG-DAY)" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
What percent of the total do the total occurrences represent?
And what number of unique records have a 700 with a $4 or an $e?
From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask] <http://LISTSERV.LOC.GOV> ] On Behalf Of Tennant,Roy
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 12:42 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Input screens
On 1/18/13 1/18/13 • 9:24 AM, "Ross Singer" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
How often, on aggregate, is the 100 or 700 $4 or $e used? Since I've parsed a lot of MARC records, I can tell you. Not much (and the inconsistency of the $e makes this even less useful).
I can tell you exactly, as of December 1, 2012 in WorldCat:
Total number of records: 287,229,344
Total occurrences of a 700 field: 80,731,356
Total occurrences of 700 $4: 24,908,408
Total occurrences of a 700 $e: 14,117,538