Sorry this is coming out so close to conference. It's been a busy spring!

There are a lot of discussion papers and proposals on the agenda for the annual conference. Ones of potential particular interest to the cartographic community are:

MARC proposal 2016-06: Defining field 347 (Digital File Characteristics) in the MARC 21 Holdings Format. Field 347 is defined in the bibliographic format. Defining the field in the holdings format will allow those libraries that follow the provider-neutral guidelines to record differences in characteristics between providers in the holdings record, allowing the bibliographic record to stay provider neutral.

MARC discussion paper 2016-dp17: Redefining subfield $4 to encompass URIs for relationships in the MARC 21 Authority and Bibliographic Formats.The paper explores some alternatives to defining the $4 but isn't satisfied with any of them. Redefining $4 will require some redefinition of the subfield in those fields that currently have $4 defined.

MARC discussion paper no. 2016-dp20: Recording temporary sublocation and temporary shelving location in the MARC 21 Holdings Format. This proposes adding $k (Temporary sublocation or collection) and redefining $l (Temporary location) in the 87x field so that the fields for items are the same as for the holdings field 852.

MARC discussion paper no. 2016-21: Defining subfields $e and $4 in field 752 of the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format. This would allow the recording of relator terms and relator codes in field 752 (Added Entry - Hierarchical Place Name) to provide further information as to why the place is recorded.

MARC discussion paper 2016-dp22: Defining a new subfield in field 340 to record color content in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format. Since RDA now requires catalogers to indicate the presence of color, tone, etc. in the bibliographic record (RDA7.17.1.4), there's a need for a place to record this information. Field 340 (Physical medium) has subfields defined for material properties of resources.

These are the ones that I think are of the most interest. There are a number of proposals coming from the German National Library that concern indicating linking records, linking fields, and indicating absence of ISBD punctuation which you can read about at www.loc.gov/marc

Susan Moore
University of Northern Iowa
Cedar Falls, IA  50613
[log in to unmask]