The Library of Congress >> Especially for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards

MARC Standards

HOME >> MARC Development >> Proposals List


MARC PROPOSAL NO. 2020-03

DATE: May 29, 2020
REVISED:

NAME: Modernization of Field 856 in the MARC 21 Formats

SOURCE: OCLC and the German National Library, for the Committee on Data Formats

SUMMARY: This paper proposes the modernization of the existing field 856 (Electronic Location and Access) in all MARC formats, including making nine subfields obsolete, clarifying the use of existing Second Indicator values, and defining a new Second Indicator value for Portion of Resource.

KEYWORDS: Field 856 (All formats); Electronic location and access (All formats); Field 856, 2nd indicator (All formats); Access to online information resources (All formats); Uniform Resource Identifier (All formats); URIs

RELATED: Proposal 93-4; 97-1; 99-06; 2019-01; DP 49; DP 54; DP 69; 2018-DP11; 2020-DP01; Guidelines for the Use of Field 856, Revised August 1999; Guidelines for the Use of Field 856, Revised March 2002

STATUS/COMMENTS:
05/29/20 – Made available to the MARC community for discussion.


Proposal No. 2020-03: Modernization of Field 856

1. BACKGROUND

1.1. Introduction

This proposal builds on MARC Discussion Paper No. 2020-DP01, its consideration at the MARC Advisory Committee meetings at the American Library Association Midwinter Meeting in January 2020, and reactions stemming from those exchanges. Focusing on a modernizing revision of the existing field 856 (Electronic Location and Access), this is expected to be the first of a possible set of proposals intended to bring the existing field into line with twenty-first century practices without significant loss of data and to provide for a more appropriately designed new field for the future.

The proposal suggests streamlining field 856 by making nine subfields obsolete. Clarifications of the definitions of three existing Second Indicator values are suggested, and a new Second Indicator is proposed to accommodate Uniform Resource Identifiers for only a portion of a resource.

1.2. Historical Background

Field 856 was originally proposed in 1993 in Assessing Information on the Internet:  Toward Providing Library Services for Computer-Mediated Communication, published as OCLC Research Report OCLC/OR/RR-93/1 (https://library-oclc-org.oclclibrary.idm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p267701coll27/id/5129).  It is also available in a slightly different version as the final report of the OCLC Internet Resources Project to the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Library Programs (https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED354906.pdf).  Appendix A of either version reproduces MARC Proposal 93-4, “Changes to the USMARC Bibliographic Format for Computer Files to Accommodate Online Information Resources,” intended for discussion at ALA Midwinter on January 23, 1993.  (The MARC Advisory Committee website itself does not provide links to discussion papers and proposals older than 1995.)

According to the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) (https://www.w3.org/Addressing/), the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) formed the Uniform Resource Identifiers Working Group “to define a set of standards for the encoding of system-independent resource location and identification information for the use of Internet information services” (https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/29/charters/uri-charter.html) in March 1994.  At the time that MARC field 856 was initially proposed, URIs as we know them today did not even have a defined standard.  MARC Proposal 93-4 acknowledged this fact:

Working groups of the Internet Engineering Task Force have been actively pursuing the establishment of a standardized way of encoding a pointer to a resource for any system (the Universal Resource Locator, or URL) and standardized ways of identifying resources (the Uniform Resource Identifier and Uniform Resource Number--names of these have changed and are current as of November 1992).  The Uniform Resource Number is roughly equivalent to an ISBN for a networked resource.  The definition of a Uniform Resource Identifier is still under discussion.  Once the IETP standards are developed and implemented, it will be necessary to include fields in the USMARC format for some or all of these data elements.

The volatility of the electronic location may be a problem if this data is included in a USMARC record.  The content designators that follow are being proposed to allow for electronic location and access information to be carried in a USMARC record.  At the point when the IETF completes its work in developing a Universal Resource Locator and its implementation is possible, including approporiate [sic] links to USMARC systems, this field may no longer be needed.  The work of the IETF promises a solution more useful than that being proposed in this paper.  However, in the meantime, the data is needed in the USMARC record for electronic resources, even if it is less than a perfect solution.  It is expected that the kinds of resources for which USMARC cataloging will be done will likely be less volatile than much of what exists on the Internet as a whole.

Proposal 93-4 as it originally stood included twenty subfields for field 856, but none of them resembled what we now know as subfield $u, Uniform Resource Identifier, for the logical reason that URIs did not yet exist.  By the time of the publication of the "format integrated" 1994 Edition of the USMARC Format for Bibliographic Data in March of that year, subfield $u, defined as Uniform Resource Locator, had been added to field 856.

LC’s superseded document Guidelines for the Use of Field 856, Revised August 1999 included an "Attachment B:  Subfield Use When Not Using $u (URL)," which outlined which subfields were likely and unlikely to be used in certain circumstances, even in 1999.  Earlier iterations of the document do not seem to be available.

ATTACHMENT B: Subfield Use When Not Using $u (URL)

If 1st indicator = 0 (email) and a URL is not recorded in $u, the following subfields are used:

$a Host name
$f Electronic name

May also use: $b, $h, $i, $m, $n, $s, $x, $z
Unlikely to use: $c, $d, $k, $l, $o, $p, $t, $2

Those not listed can theoretically be used but no examples have been identified. This is equivalent to URL mailto: scheme.

If 1st indicator = 1 (ftp) and a URL is not recorded in $u, the following subfields are used:

$a Host name (or can use unique elements in $d and/or $f below and omit $a)
$d Path
$f Electronic name

May also use: $b, $c, $g, $i, $k, $l, $m, $n, $o, $p, $q, $s, $x, $3
Unlikely to use: $h, $t, $2

Those not listed can theoretically be used but no examples have been identified. This is equivalent to URL ftp: scheme.

If 1st indicator = 2 (Remote login) and a URL is not recorded in $u, the following subfield is used:

$a Host name

May also use: $b, $k, $l, $m, $n, $o, $p, $t, $x, $z, $3
Unlikely to use: $c, $d, $f, $g, $q, $s, $2

Those not listed can theoretically be used but no examples have been identified. This is equivalent to URL telnet: scheme.

The document’s current version, Guidelines for the Use of Field 856, Revised March 2003 omits the attachment but states, "The data in field 856 may be a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI), which is recorded in subfield $u. The necessary locator information may also be parsed into separate defined subfields. Note that separate subfields for locator data was provided when this field was first established in 1993, but generally, these are seldom used."  It further noted that the most commonly used elements are First Indicator value 4 and subfields $u, $z, and $3.

As what is now called MARC 21 continued to evolve within the ever-changing digital environment, field 856 remained saddled with alphabetic subfields of limited, if not downright obsolete, utility.  There being a mere 26 letters in the English alphabet, those many now-useless subfields occupy valuable real estate that, after some careful examination, could be freed up for uses more beneficial to catalogers for describing, and to library users for accessing, what have become ubiquitous online resources.

1.3. Current Definition of Field 856

Field 856 is structured identically in the MARC Bibliographic, Authority, Holdings, Classification, and Community Information formats, although the definition and scope differ slightly from format to format. The Bibliographic field 856 is currently defined as follows:

FIELD DEFINITION AND SCOPE

Information needed to locate and access an electronic resource. The field may be used in a bibliographic record for a resource when that resource or a subset of it is available electronically. In addition, it may be used to locate and access an electronic version of a non-electronic resource described in the bibliographic record or a related electronic resource.

See the Guidelines for the Use of Field 856 for a more thorough discussion on the use of field 856.

Field 856 is repeated when the location data elements vary (the URL in subfield $u or subfields $a, $b, $d, when used). It is also repeated when more than one access method is used, different portions of the item are available electronically, mirror sites are recorded, different formats/resolutions with different URLs are indicated, and related items are recorded.

In this context, it also seemed relevant to note the slight variations in field 856 usage in each of the five MARC 21 formats.

1.4. Meeting at LC, 2019 June 20

On 2019 June 20, representatives of the Library of Congress Network Development and MARC Standards Office (NDMSO) (Sally McCallum, Jodi Williamschen, and John Zagas), the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek (DNB) (Reinhold Heuvelmann), and OCLC (Robert Bremer, Nathan Putnam, and Jay Weitz) met at LC to discuss what would become MARC 21 Update No. 28:  Addendum.  Additional outcomes of that meeting are documented in the Status/Comments section of MARC Proposal No. 2019-01.

One outcome of this meeting was the suggestion to make obsolete those subfields in field 856 that are irrelevant or no longer needed in current practice.

1.5. MARC Discussion Paper No. 2020-DP01

In the reactions to MARC Discussion Paper No. 2020-DP01, sentiment seemed to favor retaining field 856, but was divided between leaving the field substantially unchanged or clearing out the now-useless subfields.  As part of the preparation for the June 2019 meeting, the three institutions compiled the statistics below on the respective uses of the elements of field 856 as of mid-2019.  The “Candidate for Obsolescence” column has been updated to reflect the consensus of the discussions.

Note that the “D-A-CH Statistics” column sums up statistics gathered from several institutions (including the regional library networks) in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, kindly combined and provided by the German National Library.  The acronym “D-A-CH” represents those three major German-speaking nations based on their international vehicle registration codes:  Germany (D for Deutschland), Austria (A for Austria), and Switzerland (CH for Confoederatio Helvetica).

Element

Definition

OCLC Statistics

D-A-CH Statistics

LC Statistics

Candidate for Obsolescence

First Indicator

Access method

 

 

 

 

 I1 #

 No information  provided

 

 12,350,870

 9,003

 

 I1 0

 Email

 

 448

 2,549

 

 I1 1

 FTP

 

 415

 373

 

 I1 2

 Remote login  (Telnet)

 

 11

 14

 

 I1 3

 Dial-up

 

 1

 31

 

 I1 4

 HTTP

 

 22,956,069

 2,258,003

 

 I1 7

 Method specified in  subfield $2

 

 711

 2,894

 

Second Indicator

Relationship

 I2 #

 No information  provided

 

 10,143,344

 82,113

 

 I2 0

 Resource

 

 6,533,428

 279,243

 

 I2 1

 Version of resource

 

 1,172,712

 1,041,740

 

 I2 2

 Related resource

 

 17,648,797

 868,900

 

 I2 8

 No display constant  generated

 

 16,429

 101

 

Numeric Subfields

 

 

 

 

 0

 [Not defined]

 1

 0

 0

 

 1

 [Not defined]

 128

 0

 0

 

 2

 Access method

 89,911

 2,488

 2,873

 

 3

 Materials specified

 128,463,399

 20,980,391

 1,780,414

 

 4

 [Not defined]

 1,212

 0

 0

 

 5

 [Not defined]

 6,464

 0

 0

 

 6

 Linkage

 353,459

 0

 1

 

 7

 Access status [New  2019]

 3

 0

 0

 

 8

 Field link and  sequence number

 2,590

 402,603

 0

 

 9

 [Not defined]

 201

 0

 0

 

Alphabetic Subfields

 

 

 

 

 a

 Host name

 399,581

 14,928

 3,772

 

 b

 Access number

 17,234

 143

 35

 YES

 c

 Compression  information

 7,223

 69

 16

 

 d

 Path

 68,417

 1,212

 210,238

 

 f

 Electronic name

 87,520

 952

 210,527

 

 g

 Uniform Resource  Name (URN)  [Obsolete 2000]

 

 135

 17

 [Made Obsolete in 2000]

 h

 Processor of request

 3,587

 20

 223

 YES

 i

 Instruction

 51,968,242

 86

 1,202

 YES

 j

 Bits per second

 484

 0

 4

 YES

 k

 Password

 848

 33

 34

 YES

 l

 Logon

 841

 190

 2

 YES

 m

 Contact for access  assistance

 1,279,489

 15,746,227

 2,259

 

 n

 Name of location of  host

 16,852

 70,045

 226

 YES

 o

 Operating system

 6,273

 3,230,753

 2

 

 p

 Port

 1,398

 1,080

 19

 

 q

 Electronic format  type [Redefined  1997]

 4,346,131

 17,163,570

 100,553

 

 r

 Settings

 204

 3

 3

 YES

 s

 File size

 85,965

 184,571

 9

 

 t

 Terminal emulation

 4,138

 75

 4

 YES

 u

 Uniform Resource  Identifier (URI)

 193,574,115

 35,173,845

 2,298,304

 

 v

 Hours access  method available

 453,223

 23,075

 1,101

 

 w

 Record control  number

 27,248

 14

 46

 

 x

 Nonpublic note

 65,215,913

 13,249,575

 3,983

 

 y

 Link text [New  2000]

 56,679,793

 958,383

 994

 

 z

 Public note

 34,317,951

 64,349,063

 98,125

 

The aforementioned “Attachment B:  Subfield Use When Not Using $u (URL),” reproduced in Section 1.2, may offer some insight into why certain defined subfields were rarely used.

2. DISCUSSION

As stated concisely in the minutes of the MARC Advisory Committee meetings of June 2019 (http://www.loc.gov/marc/mac/minutes/an-19.html), “[T]he current MARC 856 structure was largely devised during an early period of online resource description and connectivity; many of the 856 structures and values defined are no longer applicable within today’s environment.”

One major outcome of the June 20, 2019, meeting at LC was the charge to begin a process of thoroughly reexamining field 856 including the possible cleaning out and making obsolete subfields that are now of little use.

3. PROPOSED CHANGES AND EXAMPLES

3.1. Field 856 Subfields to be Made Obsolete

During the consideration of Discussion Paper No. 2020-DP01, several of the subfields suggested for deprecation were defended. The following nine subfields, however, were at least implicitly accepted as no longer worthy of retention and are candidates for joining subfield $g (Uniform Resource Name), which was declared obsolete in 2000, in the trash bin of Content Designator History.

$b - Access number (R)
Access number associated with a host. It can contain the Internet Protocol (IP) numeric address if the item is an Internet resource, or a telephone number if dial-up access is provided through a telephone line. This data may change frequently and may be generated by the system, rather than statically stored.
May be repeated if all the other information in the field applies.

$h - Processor of request (NR)
Username, or processor of the request; generally the data which precedes the at sign (@) in the host address.

$i - Instruction (R)
Instruction or command needed for the remote host to process a request.

$j - Bits per second (NR)
Lowest and highest number of bits (binary units) of data that can be transmitted per second when connected to a host. The syntax for recording the number of bits per second (BPS) should be: <Lowest BPS>-<Highest BPS>. If only lowest given: <Lowest BPS>- ; If only highest given: -<Highest BPS>.

$k - Password (NR)
Password required to access the electronic resource. An FTP site may require the user to enter an Internet Protocol address or may require a specific password. Electronically accessed catalogs may also require a password. If a system that requires a password will accept anything entered as valid, this subfield can be omitted from field 856. This subfield is used to record general-use passwords, and should not contain passwords requiring security. Textual instructions about passwords are contained in subfield $z (Public note).

$l - Logon (NR)
Characters needed to connect (i.e., logon, login, etc.) to an electronic resource or FTP site. Used to record general-use logon strings which do not require special security.
An account number required for login may also be indicated. For many general-use File Transfer Protocol servers, access is gained by entering the string anonymous.

$n - Name of location of host (NR)
Conventional name of the location of the host in subfield $a, including its physical (geographic) location.

$r - Settings (NR)
Settings used for transferring data. Included in settings are: 1) Number Data Bits (the number of bits per character); 2) Number Stop Bits (the number of bits to signal the end of a byte); and 3) Parity (the parity checking technique used). The syntax of these elements is:
<Parity>-<Number Data Bits>-<Number Stop Bits>
If only the parity is given, the other elements of settings and their related hyphens are omitted (i.e., <Parity>). If one of the other two elements is given, the hyphen for the missing element is recorded in its proper position (i.e., <Parity>--<Number Stop Bits> or <Parity>-<Number Data Bits>- ). The values for parity are: O (Odd), E (Even), N (None), S (Space), and M (Mark).

$t - Terminal emulation (R)
Terminal emulation is usually specified for remote login (first indicator contains value 2 (Remote login (Telnet))).

3.2. Changes to Second Indicator (Relationship)

The Second Indicator has been used to specify the "Relationship between the electronic resource at the location identified in field 856 and the item described in the record as a whole. Subfield $3 is used to provide further information about the relationship if it is not a one-to-one relationship." The need for a more detailed description of that relationship, as well as a clarification of the existing indicator values, has been recognized.  Here we consider changes to the Second Indicator to clarify existing values and allow for an additional option.

Note that in the MARC Authority format and the MARC Classification format all current values are defined, but only value “blank” (No information provided) is used.

3.2.1. Revision of Second Indicator Value 0 (Resource)

Currently, Second Indicator value 0 is defined as follows:

0 - Resource
Electronic location in field 856 is for the same resource described by the record as a whole. In this case, the item represented by the bibliographic record is an electronic resource. If the data in field 856 relates to a constituent unit of the resource represented by the record, subfield $3 is used to specify the portion(s) to which the field applies. Display constant Electronic resource: may be generated.

We propose limiting the use of value 0 to indicate only that the electronic location in field 856 is for the same resource described by the record as a whole. When the field 856 relates to a constituent unit of the resource represented by the record, a new Second Indicator value 4 is to be used, along with subfield $3 to specify the portion or portions. Value 0 is to be redefined as follows:

Proposed Revision:

0 - Resource
Electronic location in field 856 is for the same resource described by the record as a whole. Value 0 is to be used only In cases where the resource represented by the bibliographic record is itself an electronic resource. Display constant Electronic resource: may be generated.
If the data in field 856 relate to a constituent unit of the resource represented by the record, use value 4 in conjunction with subfield $3, which specifies the portion(s) to which the field applies.

Examples

245 10  Hepatitis C viruses : $b the story of a scientific and therapeutic revolution / $c edited by Arash Grakoui, Jean-Michel Pawlotsky, and Glenn Randall.
300     1 online resource (ix, 469 pages, 6 pages of plates) : $b illustrations
856 40  $u https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1613

245 10  Roswell / $c Federal Bureau of Investigation.
300     1 online resource (1 unnumbered page) : $b digital, PDF file
856 40  $u http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS98141

3.2.2. Clarification of Second Indicator Value 1 (Version of Resource)

Currently, Second Indicator value 1 is defined as follows:

1 - Version of resource
Location in field 856 is for an electronic version of the resource described by the record. In this case, the item represented by the bibliographic record is not electronic but an electronic version is available. If the data in field 856 relates to a constituent unit of the resource represented by the record, subfield $3 is used to specify the portion(s) to which the field applies. Display constant Electronic version: may be generated.

We propose limiting the use of value 1 to indicate only that the electronic location in field 856 is for an electronic version of the tangible resource described by the record as a whole. When the field 856 relates to an electronic version of a constituent unit of the tangible resource represented by the record, the new Second Indicator value 4 is to be used, along with subfield $3 to specify the portion or portions. Value 1 is to be redefined as follows:

Proposed Revision:

1- Version of resource
Electronic location in field 856 is for an electronic version of the tangible resource described by the record as a whole. Value 1 is to be used only in cases where the resource represented by the bibliographic record is not itself electronic, but an electronic version of the resource is available at the specified location. Display constant Electronic version: may be generated.
If the data in field 856 relate to a constituent unit of the resource represented by the record, use value 4 in conjunction with subfield $3, which specifies the portion(s) to which the field applies.

Examples

245 00  Herbert Hoover National Historic Site, Iowa : $b Junior Ranger activity book.
300     14 pages : $b illustrations (chiefly color) ; $c 28 cm
856 41  $u https://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo105955

245 10  FY 2002 economic outlook, highlights from FY 1994 to FY 2001, FY 2002 baseline projections.
300     ii, 235 pages : $b illustrations ; $c 28 cm
856 41  $u http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS9436

3.2.3. Clarification of Second Indicator Value 2 (Related Resource)

Currently, Second Indicator value 2 is defined as follows:

2 - Related resource
Location in field 856 is for an electronic resource that is related to the bibliographic item described by the record. In this case, the item represented by the bibliographic record is not the electronic resource itself. Subfield $3 can be used to further characterize the relationship between the electronic item identified in field 856 and the item represented by the bibliographic record as a whole. Display constant Related electronic resource: may be generated.

We propose narrowing the use of value 2 to electronic resources that have a specific bibliographic relationship to the resource described in the body of the record, rather than, for instance, a mere general subject relationship to the resource.  Value 2 is to be defined as follows:

Proposed Revision:

2 - Related resource
Electronic location in field 856 is for an electronic resource that has a specific relationship to the bibliographic resource described by the record but is not a constituent part of the resource. Examples include electronic finding aids or supplements to tangible resources. Value 2 is to be used only in cases where the resource represented by the bibliographic record is not the electronic resource itself. Corresponding use of subfield $3 is strongly encouraged to further characterize the relationship between the electronic resource identified in field 856 and the resource represented by the bibliographic record as a whole as well as subfield $z when additional details are needed. Display constant Related electronic resource: may be generated.

Examples

245 04  The Brooklyn city directory ...
300     volumes $b folded maps $c 18-17 cm
776 08  $i Online version: $t Brooklyn city directory ... $w (OCoLC)889644646
856 41  $3 Google $u http://books.google.com/books?id=PcBCAQAAMAAJ
856 42  $3 Finding aid $u https://www.bklynlibrary.org/brooklyncollection/finding-aid/guide-brooklyn-city-and

245 12  A catalogue of polyphonic songs, 1415-1480 / $c David Fallows.
300     xi, 777 pages : $b music ; $c 24 cm
776 08  $i Online version: $a Fallows, David. $t Catalogue of polyphonic songs, 1415-1480. $d Oxford ; New York : Oxford University Press, 1999 $w (OCoLC)642405406
856 42  $3 Author's list of corrections, adjustments, and additions $u http://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/david.fallows/appendix.pdf
856 44  $3 Table of contents $u http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/enhancements/fy0602/98007970-t.html

3.2.4. Definition of New Second Indicator Value 4 for Portion of Resource

We propose the definition of a new Second Indicator value 4 for Portion of Resource:

4 - Portion of resource
Electronic location in field 856 is for an electronic resource that constitutes a constituent unit or units of the resource represented by the record, such as a title page, a table of contents, or a sample chapter. The resource represented by the record itself may be an electronic resource or a non-electronic resource. Subfield $3 is used to specify the portion(s) to which the field applies. Display constant Portion of resource: may be generated.

Examples

245 10  Copyright law for librarians and educators : $b creative strategies and practical solutions / $c Kenneth D. Crews ; with contributions from Dwayne K. Buttler [and others].
300     ix, 141 pages : $b illustrations ; $c 28 cm
856 44  $3 Table of contents $u http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/toc/ecip0512/2005013804.html

245 10  TransWest Express Transmission Project final environmental impact statement.
300     1 online resource (100 files, various pagings) : $b illustrations, color maps
856 44  $3 Glossary $u http://files.library.northwestern.edu/transportation/online/unrestricted/EIS/2015/20150121/8-0_Glossary.pdf

4. BIBFRAME DISCUSSION

The subfields that will be made obsolete are not needed in the BIBFRAME environment. Any improvements to the content of field 856 will streamline the conversion between MARC and BIBFRAME.

5. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES

Make the following changes to field 856 (Electronic Location and Access) in all five MARC 21 formats:

5.1. Make the following subfields obsolete:

The 856 field would subsequently look like this (with the addition of proposed Ind 2 value 4):

5.2. Revise the definitions of Second Indicator values 0, 1, and 2 as follows:

0 - Resource
Electronic location in field 856 is for the same resource described by the record as a whole. Value 0 is to be used only In cases where the resource represented by the bibliographic record is itself an electronic resource. Display constant Electronic resource: may be generated.
If the data in field 856 relate to a constituent unit of the resource represented by the record, use value 4 in conjunction with subfield $3, which specifies the portion(s) to which the field applies.

1 - Version of resource
Electronic location in field 856 is for an electronic version of the tangible resource described by the record as a whole. Value 1 is to be used only in cases where the resource represented by the bibliographic record is not itself electronic, but an electronic version of the resource is available at the specified location. Display constant Electronic version: may be generated.
If the data in field 856 relate to a constituent unit of the resource represented by the record, use value 4 in conjunction with subfield $3, which specifies the portion(s) to which the field applies.

2 - Related resource
Electronic location in field 856 is for an electronic resource that has a specific relationship to the bibliographic resource described by the record but is not a constituent part of the resource. Examples include electronic finding aids or supplements to tangible resources. Value 2 is to be used only in cases where the resource represented by the bibliographic record is not the electronic resource itself. Corresponding use of subfield $3 is strongly encouraged to further characterize the relationship between the electronic resource identified in field 856 and the resource represented by the bibliographic record as a whole as well as subfield $z when additional details are needed. Display constant Related electronic resource: may be generated.

5.3. Define a new Second Indicator value 4 for Portion of Resource as follows:

4 - Portion of resource
Electronic location in field 856 is for an electronic resource that constitutes a constituent unit or units of the resource represented by the record, such as a title page, a table of contents, or a sample chapter. The resource represented by the record itself may be an electronic resource or a non-electronic resource. Subfield $3 is used to specify the portion(s) to which the field applies. Display constant Portion of resource: may be generated.


HOME >> MARC Development >> Proposals List

The Library of Congress >> Especially for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards
( 06/29/2020 )
Legal | External Link Disclaimer Contact Us