Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 4 Jan 2007 08:47:36 -0600 |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: MAPS-L: Anyone using the 662?
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 09:42:39 -0500
From: Amy Phillips <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Organization: Harvard College Library
To: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Dear Colleen,
I have never used this field but according to the latest of "MARC
Standards: MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data" list of valid
bibliographic fields (through /Cataloger's Desktop/) it IS valid. I've
seen, especially DLC, cataloging using the 752 instead of 662 to
document hierarchical place name (i.e. added entry as opposed to
subject). Moreover, when I just tried to insert a 662 into my record,
OCLC Connexion gave me an invalid notice. Apparently, MARC21 and OCLC
Connexion are not in agreement about this field's validity.
?
Bests,
Amy Phillips
Maps-L wrote:
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Anyone using the 662?
> Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 07:28:27 -0500 (EST)
> From: Colleen Cahill <[log in to unmask]>
> To: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum
> <[log in to unmask]>
>
> Has anyone in the map community started to use the 662 field in their
> cataloging? If so, are there any issues with this field in OCLC or Rlin?
>
> Thank you!
>
> Colleen
>
> Colleen R. Cahill | [log in to unmask]
> Digital Conversion Coordinator | (202)707-8540
> & Recommending Officer for | FAX (202)707-8531
> Science Fiction & Fantasy | Library of Congress
> These opinions are mine, Mine, Mine! | Washington, DC 20540-4652
|
|
|