The Library of Congress >> Especially
for Librarians and Archivists >> StandardsThe Library of Congress >> Especially
for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards
HOME >> MARC Development >> Discussion Paper List
DATE: January 3, 2020
REVISED:
NAME: Defining a New Field for Manifestation Statements in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format
SOURCE: MARC/RDA Working Group
SUMMARY: This paper describes defining a new field to accommodate Resource Description and Access "Manifestation Statements" in the MARC 21 Bibliographic format.
KEYWORDS: Manifestation Statement (BD); RDA Toolkit Restructure and Redesign Project; RDA
RELATED:
STATUS/COMMENTS:
01/03/20 – Made available to the MARC community for discussion.
01/26/20 – Results of MARC Advisory Committee discussion: The committee was generally supportive of the proposed 881 field, with general agreement of the utility of subfields $i and $3. The community’s opinion was divided over whether subfield $z should be defined to carry a value for “other manifestation statement” as distinct from “manifestation statement” in $a; whereas some considered it desirable to encode generalized selections of transcribed information discretely, others felt that it was unnecessary to supplement the high level element defined in RDA which allows for the transcription of both whole sources and miscellaneous excerpts of information from those sources. MAC reached consensus that, in addition to subfields $a to $o and $3, an additional 881 subfield is needed to encode transcription rules ( i.e., content standards); perhaps $2. There was a preference that the order of manifestation statements presented in MARC documentation should follow the order found in the ISBD/MARC element order for identifiers, titles, editions, etc. However, it was acknowledged that the 881 subfield sort at input should follow the order of elements as presented on the source of metadata. There was also general support for using RDA terminology. The paper will return as a proposal.
The RDA Toolkit Restructure and Redesign Project (3R) has introduced a new Manifestation level element called "manifestation statement" to the RDA element set. The RDA beta Toolkit defines manifestation statement as:
"A statement appearing in a manifestation and deemed to be significant for users to understand how the manifestation represents itself"
(cf. https://beta.rdatoolkit.org/Content/ContentById/307f510f-2ba9-4f2f-95d6-d5fc18c1b4e1)
General guidelines on manifestation statements in the new Toolkit further elaborate:
"A manifestation may carry information that describes the manifestation itself. This information is recorded to follow the principle of representation. A manifestation statement supports the user tasks identify and find. Although some manifestation statements are presented in a standard layout in some publishing traditions, there are no common approaches at global level and across all kinds of manifestation. A manifestation statement is therefore recorded only as an unstructured description."
(cf. https://beta.rdatoolkit.org/Guidance/GuidanceById?id=59ec94d6-cbe3-48a3-b70d-344d7ccea96a)
There is a general “manifestation statement” element, and a list of sub-types:
No content designation is currently available in MARC 21 to record manifestation statements. Existing fields are too granular and serve to break down what should be entered as free text strings. New content designation would allow the encoding of whole or partial title page content, etc. using scanned data (e.g. recorded using light pen). It would also allow the exact transcription of statements for early printed resources (e.g. complex publication / distribution and manufacture statements). Sufficient content designation is still available to record manifestation statements (although not consistently field by field).
During meetings in December 2019, the MARC/RDA Working Group analyzed and discussed various approaches. The group came to the conclusion that there does not seem to be a need for changing existing fields, indicator values, or subfields to cover the RDA manifestation statements. Instead, the suggestion here is to define only one new field, covering all manifestation statements.
Choosing a field number is not a trivial task in this case: The new field will in some respect represent a broad selection of the descriptive parts of a MARC bibliographic record as a whole, but in a less granular way than the existing MARC content designation. By this, the following sections are to be excluded (cf. //www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic):
00X: Control Fields
01X-09X: Numbers and Code Fields
1XX: Main Entry Fields
20X-24X: Title and Title-Related Fields
25X-28X: Edition, Imprint, Etc. Fields
4XX: Series Statement Fields
6XX: Subject Access Fields
70X-75X: Added Entry Fields
76X-78X: Linking Entry Fields
80X-83X: Series Added Entry Fields
A field number in one of the following sections seems feasible:
3XX: Physical Description, Etc. Fields
5XX: Note Fields
841-88X: Holdings, Location, Alternate Graphics, Etc. Fields
The MARC/RDA Working Group is proposing defining new field "881" for Manifestation Statements in the 841-88X block (cf. //www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd84188x.html) of the MARC Bibliographic format.
Both indicator positions are undefined, each one contains a blank.
The new field should contain designated subfields for each of the specific manifestation statements, and a subfield $a for the high-level manifestation statement as a whole, plus a subfield for an "other manifestation statement".
Additionally, subfield $i may be defined to provide information about the source, i.e. about the part of the manifestation from which the statement is taken, e.g., from the title page, from the cover, from the spine, from the title frame, from the container, etc. By repeating the field and grouping the main subfields with subfield $i, single or selected manifestation statements and their respective sources can be expressed. Subfield $i is already defined with a similar meaning for a "Display text" e.g. in field 246 (Varying Form of Title). Thought has been given to other possible subfield codes, such as subfield $2 (Source) (mostly used for MARC codes providing context for identifiers, values from controlled vocabularies, or for the designation of a thesaurus in linking fields); subfield $n (Note) as defined in several fields, most prominently in the 76X – 78X range; or the pair of $x and $z subfields for nonpublic/public notes in a field context, as defined e.g. in field 363, some note fields, and fields 852, 856 and 885.
Taking the above into consideration, the proposed new field "881" could be defined as follows:
881 – Manifestation Statements (R)
Field definition and Scope
The field contains manifestation statements, i.e. information that describes the manifestation itself. A manifestation statement is recorded as an unstructured description. Elements for recording a manifestation statement are defined for broad categories of information.
The field contains a high-level manifestation statement in subfield $a, or single more specific manifestation statements in subfields $b through $h and $j through $n, an "other manifestation statement" in $z, or a mixture of them. The field may as well contain information about the source, i.e. about the part of the manifestation from which the statement is taken, designated in $i. The field may be repeated if a distinction of different sources is to be made.Indicators
First Indicator # - Undefined
Second Indicator # - Undefined
Subfield codes
Note: Subfield $i is the only subfield in the field that is non-repeatable. Regardless of the fact that some of the main fields in MARC Bibliographic with reference to a specific subfield in field 881 are non-repeatable (e.g. field 245 – field 881 subfield for a "Manifestation title and responsibility statement"), for reasons of flexibility each of the other subfields are defined as repeatable.Option 1: subfields $b through $h, and $j through $o arranged in alphabetical order:
$i – Source of information (NR)
$a - Manifestation statement, high-level/general (R)
$b - Manifestation copyright statement (R)
$c - Manifestation designation of sequence statement (R)
$d - Manifestation dissertation statement (R)
$e - Manifestation distribution statement (R)
$f - Manifestation edition statement (R)
$g - Manifestation frequency statement (R)
$h - Manifestation identifier statement (R)$j - Manifestation manufacture statement (R)
$k - Manifestation production statement (R)
$l - Manifestation publication statement (R)
$m - Manifestation regional encoding statement (R)
$n - Manifestation series statement (R)
$o - Manifestation title and responsibility statement (R)$z – Other manifestation statement (R)
Option 2: subfields arranged in MARC element equivalence order:
$i – Source of information (NR)
$a - Manifestation statement, high-level/general (R)
$b – Manifestation identifier statement (R)
$c – Manifestation title and responsibility statement (R)
$d – Manifestation edition statement (R)
$e – Manifestation production statement (R)
$f - Manifestation publication statement (R)
$g – Manifestation distribution statement (R)
$h - Manifestation manufacture statement (R)$j - Manifestation copyright statement (R)
$k - Manifestation frequency statement (R)
$l - Manifestation designation of sequence statement (R)
$m – Manifestation series statement (R)
$n – Manifestation dissertation statement (R)
$o - Manifestation regional encoding statement (R)$z – Other manifestation statement (R)
(Note that the subfield coding in the examples is based on option 2.)
Example 1
LDR xxxxxnam a22yyyyy c 4500
001 123456789
003 DE-101
008 150429suuuu || ||||| |||| 00|||||||
245 10 $aCrossing the chasm
881 ## $aCROSSING THE CHASM Marketing and Selling Disruptive Products to Mainstream Customers THIRD EDITION Geoffrey A. Moore HARPER BUSINESS An Imprint of HarperCollinsPublishers Copyright © 1991, 1999, 2002, 2014 by Geoffrey A. Moore Printed in the United States of America Originally published in hardcover in 1991 by HarperBusiness, and imprint of HarperCollins Publishers. 2014 ISBN: 978-0-06-229298-8 USA $19.99 A BUSINESSWEEK BESTSELLER
Example 2
LDR xxxxxnam a22yyyyy c 4500
001 123456789
003 DE-101
008 150429suuuu || ||||| |||| 00|||||||
245 10 $aCrossing the chasm
881 ## $bISBN: 978-0-06-229298-8 $cCROSSING THE CHASM Marketing and Selling Disruptive Products to Mainstream Customers Geoffrey A. Moore $dTHIRD EDITION $ePrinted in the United States of America $fHARPER BUSINESS An Imprint of HarperCollinsPublishers 2014 $jCopyright © 1991, 1999, 2002, 2014 by Geoffrey A. Moore $mA BUSINESSWEEK BESTSELLER $zOriginally published in hardcover in 1991 by HarperBusiness, an imprint of HarperCollins Publishers. $zUSA $19.99
Example 3
LDR xxxxxnam a22yyyyy c 4500
001 123456789
003 DE-101
008 150429suuuu || ||||| |||| 00|||||||
245 10 $aCrossing the chasm
881 ## $iInformation from title page $cCROSSING THE CHASM Marketing and Selling Disruptive Products to Mainstream Customers Geoffrey A. Moore $dTHIRD EDITION $fHARPER BUSINESS An Imprint of HarperCollinsPublishers
881 ## $iInformation from cover $bISBN: 978-0-06-229298-8 $cCROSSING THE CHASM MARKETING AND SELLING DISRUPTIVE PRODUCTS TO MAINSTREAM COSTUMERS WITH ALL NEW EXAMPLES FROM 21ST-CENTURY SUCCESS STORIES GEOFFREY A. MOORE Author of Escape Velocity $d3RD EDITION $mA BUSINESSWEEK BESTSELLER $zUSA $19.99 $zAVAILABLE FROM HARPERCOLLINS E-BOOKS
BIBFRAME accommodates the various statements that RDA discusses. In some cases the statement is an existing property, such as the “series statement”, which is a literal and expected to be transcribed from the item. The other statements are accommodated in fields with expected value of literal and any field that does not can use rdfs:label for the literal value.
6.1. Is the approach of defining one field for manifestation statements a path worth exploring?
6.2. Is choosing the field number "881" a feasible way? Are there better options?
6.3. Which option is preferred: Sorting the subfield codes $b through $h and $j through $o in alphabetical order (option 1), or ordered roughly in the ISBD / MARC element equivalence (option 2)?
6.4. Is there a need for an additional subfield "$z" to carry an "other manifestation statement"?
6.5. Is subfield "$i" in the new field the best option to carry "source" information?
6.6. Is there need for a subfield $3 "Materials specified", if parts of a manifestation are to be distinguished from each other, e.g., in the case of a serial changing its appearance over time?
6.7. Is keeping the RDA terminology useful, or should a more general terminology be chosen, (more) independent of the RDA terms?
6.8. Field 245 (Title Statement) and its subfield $a (Title) are not strictly mandatory in a MARC bibliographic record. Most data base systems and routines however do rely on their presence. If in 881 a subfield with a "Manifestation title and responsibility statement" is present, does a field 245 with a subfield $a still have to be present in the record? If yes, should 245 $a be filled with the title proper, or with the same content as in 881 $c, or with a default string value?
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 |