Print

Print


Jeff-

The scheme name is uri.

http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/identifiers/uri.html

$0 is "repeatable for different control numbers or identifiers."

http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/ecbdcntf.html

I have been arguing for an agreed convention for synthesizing identifiers
for subdivided headings for years. It's trivial; if anyone interested I can
repost a couple of ways of synthesizing canonical ids.

[Of course I'm not sure if subdivided headings are actually meaningful
(Karen Markey's study is the only one I was able to find, but I had serious
question marks about the methodology, and there is no other data
available).]

Simon
On Jan 31, 2015 9:33 PM, "Young,Jeff (OR)" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> J.,
>
> This raises some climate change questions. Imagine we are updating the
> validation rules for MARC $0 in these cases:
>
> http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bdx00.html
> http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bdx10.html
> http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bdx11.html
> http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bdx30.html
>
> True or false: values that start with the letters "http" should be treated
> as valid.
>
> If the answer is true, here is a follow up question. Should the
> traditional "(XXX)YYYY" form of $0 be treated as a separate field entry or
> is $0 within a field repeatable? I wonder because more and more authority
> files don't bother registering in the traditional form.
>
> If either form of identifier is acceptable, can they be reconciled using
> MARC?
>
> What about constructed headings where at least some of the pieces can be
> controlled? Can $0 be used there too, without colliding with the 1st case?
>
> One conclusion from this riddle might be that opaque identifiers are
> inherently evil and only transparent names (aka "strings") can be trusted
> in the long haul. Unique names seems be harder to come by, though. It's
> sad, but true.
>
> "Jeff"
>
> > On Jan 31, 2015, at 8:10 PM, J. McRee Elrod <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > Robert said:
> >
> >> * There's more future than there is past.
> >
> >
> > That's debatable.  Doesn't it depend on what we do about climate change?
> >
> > The whole linked data effort may depend on resources not too long
> available.
> >
> >
> >   __       __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([log in to unmask])
> >  {__  |   /     Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
> >  ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
>