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

MARC Standards

HOME >> MARC Development >> Discussion Paper List


MARC DISCUSSION PAPER NO. 2020-DP02

DATE: December 20, 2019
REVISED:

NAME: Adding Subfield $0 to Fields 504 and 525 of the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format

SOURCE: Network Development and MARC Standards Office (NDMSO), Library of Congress

SUMMARY: This paper proposes adding subfield $0 (Authority record control number or standard number) to fields in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format that currently do not have subfield $0 defined: Field 504 (Bibliography, etc. Note) and Field 525 (Supplement Note). Revised definitions for each field are also suggested.

KEYWORDS: Subfield $0, in field 504 (BD); Bibliography, etc. Note (BD); Subfield $0, in field 525 (BD); Supplement Note (BD); Authority record control number or standard number (BD)

RELATED: 2017-08, 2019-DP05

STATUS/COMMENTS:
12/20/19 – Made available to the MARC community for discussion.

01/26/20 – Results of MARC Advisory Committee discussion: There was broad consensus that a need for the proposed changes had been demonstrated, but there was also general agreement that the provision for eye-readable notes must also be retained should the paper move forward to the proposal stage. Some MAC members preferred the option of seeing identifers and controlled language for indexes, bibliographies and other supplementary information encoded within the 3XX block. Consideration should also be given to whether there is a similar need in the Authority format. The paper will likely return as a more focused discussion paper at Annual.


Discussion Paper No. 2020-DP02: Adding Subfield $0 to Fields 504 and 525

1. BACKGROUND

Field 504 is currently defined in the Bibliographic format as follows:

Field 525 is currently defined in the Bibliographic format as follows::

As part of the BIBFRAME cataloging pilot at the Library of Congress, the development team has tried to introduce data entry efficiencies and improve consistency of data. In the BIBFRAME editor, menu options that are tied to a controlled vocabulary have been widely used to capture such information as RDA Content/Media/Carrier Type, MARC relator codes, and headings from the LCNAF, LCSH, LCGFT and LCMPT files. The vocabulary lists have been constructed from term lists defined in the RDA Registry, term lists defined in controlled MARC fields, or a combination of the two. The URIs for these terms are added to the BIBFRAME data during the MARC to BIBFRAME conversion process.

NDMSO is now evaluating the conversion of BIBFRAME data to MARC. This analysis has shown that some MARC tags which contain data from a controlled vocabulary do not have a place for the standard identifier or URI of the term.  There are also some variable fields with controlled terms that do not have $0 defined yet.

The goal of this discussion paper is to define subfield $0 in the two MARC fields described below to facilitate the conversion of data between MARC and BIBFRAME.

2. DISCUSSION

This discussion paper proposes defining subfield $0 in the following MARC Bibliographic format fields which do not currently support inclusion, but may benefit from having subfield $0 defined for use: field 504 (Bibliography, etc. Note) and field 525 (Supplement Note).

To remain consistent with other fields, $1 (Real World Object URI) and $2 (Source) are also being proposed for inclusion. The utility of $1 in this context was questioned during the LC review, along with the conflict of repeatability vs. non-repeatability between $0 and $1.

Some note fields permit the storage of URIs in $u, as in field 520 (Summary, Etc.). However, this URI provides electronic access to descriptive data in the field. The data in $0 is a link to a related authority record or standard identifier.

The paper also suggests updating the definitions of the two fields.

3. PROPOSED CHANGES AND EXAMPLES

3.1. Field 504

In Field 504 of the MARC Bibliographic format, make the following changes:

3.1.1. Add new subfields:

$0 – Authority record control number or standard identifier (NR)
$1 – Real World Object URI (R)
$2 – Source (NR)

Examples:

504 ## $a bibliography $0 http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/msupplcont/bibliography

504 ## $a Includes bibliographic references (pages 305-325)
[a URI in subfield $0 is not provided as the text of the note does not match the label associated with the URI]

504 ## $a index $0 http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/msupplcont/index

3.1.2. Update the field definition and scope to incorporate the underlined information below:

Field Definition and Scope
Information on the presence of one or more bibliographies, discographies, filmographies, and/or other bibliographic references in a described item or in accompanying material.
For multipart items, including serials, the note may pertain to all parts or to a single part or issue.
Notes referring to tables of cases, statutes, and regulations are not recorded in this field. They are recorded in field 500 (General Note). When the presence of an index is also mentioned in a bibliography note, field 504 is used. If a note mentions contents in addition to the bibliography, and the bibliography is not deemed sufficiently extensive to warrant a separate note, the note is recorded in field 500 (General Note). In cases of doubt as to whether the note is bibliographical or not, field 504 is used rather than in field 500 (General Note). Field 525 may also contain information about additional bibliographic content.

3.1.3. Update the definition of subfield $a:

$a - Bibliography, etc. note
Entire text of the note or label for supplementary content associated with identifier in $0.

3.2. Field 525

In Field 525 of the MARC Bibliographic format, make the following changes:

3.2.1. Add new subfields:

$0 – Authority record control number or standard identifier (NR)
$1 – Real World Object URI (R)
$2 – Source (NR)

Examples:

525 ## $a Supplements accompany some issues
[a URI in subfield $0 is not provided as the text of the note does not match the label associated with the URI]

525 ## $a discography $0 http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/msupplcont/discography

3.2.2. Update the field definition and scope to incorporate the underlined information below:

Field Definition and Scope
Information on the existence of supplements or special issues that are neither cataloged in separate records nor recorded in a linking entry field 770 (Supplement/Special Issue Entry). This note field is used for unnamed supplements, special issues or other supplementary material.

3.2.3. Update the definition of subfield $a:

$a – Supplement note
Entire text of the note or label for supplementary content associated with identifier in $0.

4. BIBFRAME DISCUSSION

BIBFRAME Work or Instance: bf:supplementaryContent (property), bf:SupplementaryContent (class), accommodating either a designation of the supplementary content as a URI from a list or as a literal.

The current MARC-to-BIBFRAME data conversion generates supplementary content fields from data in MARC fields 504 and 525. Supplementary content is also created from MARC 008/24-27 for codes “b”, “i”, “k”, “q” and 31 (books), 008/24-27 (continuing resources), 008/31 (maps) and 008/24-29 (music). Supplementary content from these bytes in field 008 is assigned an identifier from a term list.

Including subfield $0 in the above fields will enable a smooth conversion of BIBFRAME data to the MARC format that preserves the URIs that come from the BIBFRAME description, since URIs added within a BIBFRAME editor, or by a MARC to BIBFRAME data conversion, will be preserved.

5. QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

5.1. Do you agree there is a use for subfields in these fields to record URIs?

5.2. Does the proposed solution meet the needs discussed?

5.3. Are there any potential consequences that this paper does not address?


HOME >> MARC Development >> Discussion Paper List

The Library of Congress >> Especially for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards
(04/28/2020)
Legal | External Link Disclaimer Contact Us