On 3/8/13 3/8/13  7:51 AM, "Ford, Kevin" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> 1) Any plans to break out the 008 (and, while at it, the 006 and 007) based on
> character position?  Ditto for Leader (which does not appear on the list, but
> we can presume it is used).

That would involve a change to the process I'm currently using, which is
possible but may take a while to develop. I'll let you know if/when it
becomes available.

> 2) Any plans to better understand the usage of fields with respect to another
> field?  For example, the 342 field (geospatial reference data) may have been
> used only 9,931 times in all of WorldCat [1] but if field 342 is used more
> than 90% of the time for cartographic material (Leader/06 is "e" or "f") then
> this one example would would suggest there may be a relative importance of one
> field in MARC depending on other factors beyond mere usage frequency.

This falls under what I would consider to be "ad hoc reporting" which is
also possible, but on a case-by-case basis. For example, I recently provided
such a report in association with the 655 field.  I'll look into this case.