 |
 |
Naun,
OCLC Connexion doesn’t currently validate $0 or $1 in 3XX fields (I just tried to see if I could add a $0 to a 368 field and a 374 field). So before the pilot
starts, OCLC (and SkyRiver?) would need to change their validation to allow participants using those platforms to add $0 and $1.
Adam
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Cataloging & Metadata Services
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Chew, Chiat Naun
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2019 2:52 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: URIs in MARC Pilot: Call for Participation
Somewhere along the line the DCM Z1 guidelines supplement was updated to say to consult PSD before using $0, $1, or $4. A previous attempt I made to raise this question with LC
didn't go anywhere, but I had the chance to ask Paul Frank about it last week and he said he did not expect a problem with using these subfields in the pilot. From what he said it sounded like using $0/$1 in 3XX and 5XX as well as 024 would be OK. I wouldn't
go ahead and start adding them routinely to NACO records yet, but I'm hoping the pilot will give us an opportunity to start introducing some of these practices.
Naun.
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]>
on behalf of Adam L Schiff <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 27 September 2019 17:25
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] URIs in MARC Pilot: Call for Participation
Currently the DCM Z1 does not allow the inclusion of URIs in subfields $0 and $1 of many authority fields. Will LC be revising the DCM Z1 and getting the utilities to allow adding URIs in authority
fields where it is authorized (e.g., 368, 370, 372, 374, 380, 385, 386)? Or for authorities are we talking only of field 024?
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Cataloging & Metadata Services
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Riemer, John
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2019 10:43 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: URIs in MARC Pilot: Call for Participation
Dear colleagues,
The PCC is launching a
URIs in MARC Pilot to engage metadata practitioners in formally applying techniques to further the PCC’s linked data transition. Several current and former PCC task groups have done excellent conceptual and policy-level work, and now it is time to “road
test” that work in practice and learn by doing what issues and questions need additional attention or clarity. The pilot activities will chiefly involve adding identifiers to bibliographic records and/or to NACO authority records.
Participants can choose to experiment in a range of focus areas based on what is of interest to their own institution, sharing their findings without each being required to delve into
all the areas that are covered by the pilot. Projects of any size, however small or large, and at any stage of progress are welcome.
The PCC invites interested institutions (both PCC and non-PCC) to participate by completing a
short
form describing their project and the issues of interest to them. Expressions of
interest by October 11 will allow the Pilot to get underway with a kick off meeting in late October.
The
PCC URIs in MARC Pilot will test and develop PCC best practices for some of the areas the
Linked Data Best Practices Group has identified, and some of the topics addressed in the
FAQ
developed by the PCC URI Task Group on URIs in MARC. The Pilot is estimated to last for 6 months, with reevaluation by the PCC Policy Committee at the 5 month mark to determine if an extension is needed to accomplish the learning outcomes. Additional background
on the Pilot is available at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vmy8lL8eNL1wfcU-UONmAnzyzvINIDSqPML4xCsXgjw/edit#
to provide greater specificity and example activities.
If you have questions, please write to
John Riemer.
Xiaoli Li
PCC Chair
John Riemer
Chair, PCC Task Group on Identity Management in NACO