Archive for the ‘MARC’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Brief History of Series Authority Work

Wednesday, March 24th, 2010

Our Authority Librarian, Karen, provided me with this extremely useful and detailed history of the way series entries are handled in both bibliographic records and authority records.

Series description has changed and evolved over time along with other descriptive cataloging practices.  Most changes have been realized in LC policies and standards as more libraries chose to follow LC practices.

Prior to Sept 1, 1989, the Library of Congress policy was to trace only some series.  They would create series authority records (SARs) for all series cataloged and record the tracing decisions on the SARs.

In the 1960’s LC developed the MARC format for the computerized storage and exchange of bibliographic information.  As series policies have changed, the MARC format fields dealing with series have also changed.

Up to 1978 when AACR2 was published (see below), MARC had the following fields defined for the input of series information:  (All definitions are from Its Marc http://itsmarc.com/crs/Bib1468.htm)

400 –   This field contains an author/title series statement in which the author portion is a personal name or a possessive pronoun that refers back to the name in the 100 main entry field in the record. Field 400 is both a series statement and a series added entry. When a 400 field is present, a corresponding 800 field is not used, since it would duplicate the 400 field

410 –   This field contains an author/title series statement in which the author portion is a corporate name or a pronoun representing it that refers back to a 110 field . Field 410 is both a series statement and a series added entry. When a 410 field is present, a corresponding 810 field is not used, since it would duplicate the 410 field.

411 –    This field contained an author/title series statement in which the author portion is a conference/meeting name or a pronoun representing it that refers back to a 111 field . Field 411 is both a series statement and a series added entry. When a 411 field is present, a corresponding 811 field is not used, since it would duplicate the 411 field.

The descriptions of the indicator values, subfields and input conventions associated with the 400, 410, 411 fields corresponded to those for the 100, 110, and 111 fields respectively, with the addition of subfields specifically for series:

$x – ISSN #

$v – Volume designation

440 –   This field contains a series statement consisting of a series title alone.  Used when the series statement and the controlled added entry form of the series title are the same. Field 440 is both a series statement and a series added entry.

490 –   This field contains a series statement for which no series added entry is to be made, or for which the series added entry is in a controlled form different from that which appears in the series statement. Field 490 does not serve as a series added entry. When field 490 is used and a series added entry is desired, both the series statement (field 490) and a corresponding series added entry (800-830 fields) are separately recorded in the bibliographic record.

800 –   This field contains an author/title series added entry in which the author portion is a personal name. It is used when the added entry form of a series is different from that in the corresponding series statement. An 800 field is usually justified by a series statement (field 490 ) or a general note (field 500 ) relating to the series.

810 –   This field contains an author/title series added entry in which the author portion is a corporate name. It is used when the added entry form of a series is different from that in the corresponding series statement. An 810 field is usually justified by a series statement (field 490 ) or a general note (field 500 ) relating to the series.

811 –   This field contains an author/title series added entry in which the author portion is a meeting or conference name. It is used when the added entry form of a series is different from that in the corresponding series statement. An 811 field is usually justified by a series statement (field 490 ) or a general note (field 500 ) relating to the series.

830 –   This field contains a title series added entry in which the entry of the series is a conventional title.  It is used when the added entry form of a series title is different from that in the corresponding series statement.

840 –   This field contains a title series added entry in which the entry of the series is under uniform title . It is used when the added entry form of a series title is different from that in the corresponding series statement.

All of the 8XX fields are justified by a series statement (field 490) or a general note (field 500 ) relating to the series.  No 8XX series added entry field was used in conjunction with a series statement in the 400-440 fields because each of these fields functions both as part of the bibliographic description and as a series added entry.  The indicator and subfield definitions for 8xx fields are the same as the corresponding 1xx fields, except for the addition of the $x (ISSN) and $v (numbering designation) subfields

In 1978 the second edition of the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules was published. Changes in the rules with the largest impact on series were the rules to formulate entries for personal, corporate, and meeting names, which made a separate distinction between the descriptive transcription and the form of entry.  So the new rules did not really provide for name/title series statements as part of the transcription.  Under these rules, the authorized form of the series (established in the authority file in Series Authority Record) did not always match the form found on the item.  So if the series were traced, it would need to be traced differently.

Library of Congress implemented AACR2 in January of 1981.  Eventually the MARC tags changed to accommodate the new cataloging rules.

The 440 and 490 fields were revised and used for the transcription of the series statement from the item.   Fields 400, 410, and 411 were no longer to be used for the transcription of the series from any type of material.

440 –   This field contains a series title statement when the series statement and the controlled added entry form of the series title are the same. Field 440 is both a series statement and a series added entry (title is traced). When a 440 field is present, a corresponding 830 field is not used since it would duplicate the 440 field.

490 –   This field contains a series statement for which no series added entry is to be made, or for which the series added entry is in a controlled form different from that which appears in the series statement. Field 490 does not serve as a series added entry. When field 490 is used and a series added entry is desired, both the series statement (field 490) and a corresponding series added entry (800-830 fields ) are separately recorded in the bibliographic record.

The 8XX fields were also revised to better accommodate the new rules.  The 800, 810, and 811 fields contain a name/title added entry used as a series added entry in which the entry of the series in under personal name, corporate name, or meeting name respectively, when the series statement is contained in field 490 (Series Statement) or field 500 (General Note) and a series added entry is required for the bibliographic record.  No 8XX series added entry field is used in conjunction with a series statement in the 400-440 fields because each field functions both as part of the bibliographic description and as a series added entry.  The indicator and subfield definitions for 8xx fields are the same as the corresponding 1xx fields, except for the addition of the $x (ISSN) and $v (numbering designation) subfields:

In 1988 fields 400, 410 and 411 were officially made obsolete in the CAN/MARC format.  They can still be used as local fields.  This left only the 440 and 490 as transcription fields.  Their definitions as well as the 8xx’s remained much the same.  Instructions are given to convert to 4xx/8xx as follows

MARC 21 conversion to current fields:

If indicator 2 is 0 in the 400, 410 or 411:

  • 4XX indicator 1 and all subfields except subfield $x convert to 8XX with same indicator 1 value and same subfields,
  • 4XX $t, $v, $x are also copied to 490 $a, $v, $x, respectively
  • 490 indicator 1 is set to 1.

If indicator 2 is 1 in the 400, 410 or 411:

  • 4XX indicator 1 and all subfields except subfields $a and $x convert to 8XX with same indicator 1 value and same subfields,
  • and all 1XX subfields are copied into the same 8XX, preceeding the subfields from the 4XX field,
  • and 4XX $t, $v, $x are also copied to 490 $a, $v, $x, respectively; 490 indicator 1 is set to 1.

On Sept. 1, 1989, Library of Congress implemented a policy to trace all series.  New series authority records showed the decision to trace.  When they needed to update a series, they would not go back and re-catalog the previous items.  The change in tracing decision would be recorded on the SAR using multiple 645 fields.

On June 1, 2006, the Library of Congress implemented its decision not to create/update series authority records and not to provide controlled series access points in its bibliographic records for resources in series.  This meant that in newly created bibliographic records for LC original cataloging (040 $a is solely “DLC”), the series statement will be given in a 490 0# field and LC will stop using 8xx fields.  This decision from LC was not well received by the cataloging community and even sparked a protest from LC catalogers

The Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) will not follow this policy.  Members will continue to provide controlled series access on records and create and maintain series authority records through their BIBCO, NACO, and CONSER programs.  More details can be found under the PCC programs NACO, BIBCO, and CONSER, and in the PCC Series Statement http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/seriesPCC.html.

LC will continue to support the PCC by deleting duplicate series records reported, answering questions if no research is needed, and coordinating and conducting series training.  In newly created CIP-partnered cataloging, in PCC member copy used for cataloging, and in non-PCC copy cataloging, existing series statements/access points will be accepted as is and “passed through.”  This will help prevent LC-issued records without series access points from overlaying records that have them in OCLC.

On June 6, 2008, MARBI (Machine-Readable Bibliographic Information) the interdivisional committee of the American Library Association that deals with MARC standards, approved the proposal to make field 440 (Series Statement/Added Entry-Title) obsolete in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format.  This was done after much debate in the library community.  This decision leaves the 490 as the only field to record the transcription of the series statement from the item. The intention of the change is to resolve the long-standing problem of field 440 being both a descriptive field and a controlled access point.  The assumption is that separating the two functions will result in a more reliable description and easier maintenance through automated authority control over time.

This led to another change approved by MARBI:

In the 490 tag, the first indicator value ‘1’ has been redefined to:

1 – Series traced in 8XX field

When value “1” is used, the appropriate field 800-830 is included in the bibliographic record to provide the series added entry using the authorized form even if that form matches the transcribed form in the 490 field.  It was felt that since there are now few space limitations in online systems, the duplication of the data in 490 and 8xx should not be a problem.  An 8XX field can still be justified by a both a series statement in the 490 field or a general note in a 500 note field.

At this same time a second MARC proposal was made and approved.  This proposal made two changes:

Added $x subfield (ISSN) to 8XX fields.

Added $3 (Materials specified) added to field 490 and 8xx fields

The Library of Congress approved these proposals on October 2, 2008.  They will continue to accept the 440 field in records, and will not be retrospectively changing any records to conform to these changes.

The library community has been somewhat divided on whether to implement these changes, some have, and some have not, or are still deciding.  Libraries always have the option to formulate policies to fit their own circumstances.

This is where series description stands as of July 2009.

———————————

References:

Website “Its MARC” The Library Corporation:  http://itsmarc.com/crs/Bib1468.htm

MARC21 Format for Bibliographic Data 1999 ed.  Library of Congress Network Development and Marc Standards Office:   http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/ecbdhome.html

MARC21 Format for Authority Data 1999 ed.  Library of Congress Network Development and Marc Standards Office:   http://www.loc.gov/marc/authority/ecadhome.html

Article “Series at the Library of Congress: June 1, 2006” on the Library of Congress website: http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/series.html

Tags:, ,
Posted in Authority Records, Bibliographic Records, MARC | Comments Closed

What is Marcadia?

Monday, October 5th, 2009

Patricia Stelter, our Vice President of Bibliographic Services put together a really informative primer on what Marcadia is, and how it helps libraries. I thought I’d share what she had to say here.

Trying to get your materials cataloged with less staff? I’ve been in your shoes and I know the solution! Marcadia is exactly what you need in these lean times.

We partner with OCLC to provide Marcadia and it is one of the unique divisions that make up Automation Services here at Backstage Library Works. One of the many advantages of Marcadia is that you don’t need an OCLC membership to get select WorldCat records. Also, it doesn’t matter what type of library you work in –if you complete acquisitions and cataloging –we can help you!

Marcadia is an extraordinary automated cataloging service that matches brief records to WorldCat MARC records according to your specifications. Even if you have newly published materials we can take as little as one or two fields of information and return premium WorldCat records to you for a very affordable $1.75 per result.

I’ve been a Library Director and I know firsthand that patrons can sometimes be demanding and how I struggled to get items cataloged and available to them. If I had known about Backstage Library Works it would have made my life much easier and I would have been able to concentrate more on grant writing, starting my Friends of the Library group and providing needed outreach to my community!

In retrospect, these are experiences that I look back on, but for you that are struggling with today’s budget shortfalls and cutbacks Marcadia can even be more beneficial. You’ve lost cataloging staff? We can do the work for you and make your life easier!

We all know that catalogers have varying opinions on what constitutes a perfect record. With Marcadia you get the perfect record every time. You tell us exactly what you want, including your preferences for certain cataloging levels or records from regarded universities, and we deliver with great efficiency the same records that trained cataloging staff would choose.

Discover how Marcadia can make your life a little more idyllic. Define your perfect record and schedule your free test run today.

Patricia Stelter

VP Bibliographic Services

Backstage Library Works

Tags:,
Posted in Bibliographic Records | 1 Comment »

We Need Your Input!

Thursday, September 10th, 2009

Judy, one of the project managers would like opinions from multiple librarians on a question we are facing right now. Here’s what she had to say.

Hello Everyone, we are looking for feedback from our community:

MARC Proposal No. 2008-06 requested that $x ISSN’s be allowed in 8XX fields (http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2008/2008-06.html) and the proposal was approved by Library of Congress on October 2, 2008.  Just recently OCLC has decided to begin allowing $x too (see their July 2009 Technical Bulletin 257 found at:  http://www.oclc.org/support/documentation/worldcat/tb/257/default.htm.

With LC’s switch from 440 to 490 and our programming changes to accommodate this, many of you are now getting $x ISSN subfields in your Bibliographic 8XXs.  This has been causing some concern and at least in one scenario, it creates a problem situation as follows:

original bib headings:
490_1 $aSTI/PUB ;$v1343
490_1 $aSafety reports series,$x1020-6450 ;$vno. 58
830_0 $aSafety reports series ;$vno. 58.

after processing:
490_1 $aSTI/PUB ;$v1343
490_1 $aSafety reports series,$x1020-6450 ;$vno. 58
830_0 $aSafety reports series ;$vno. 58.
830_0 $aSafety reports series,$x1020-6450 ;$vno. 58.

The resulting 830s happened this way because the 8XXs must link up with 490-1’s.  The system assumes the first 8XX belongs to the first 490-1 so it retained “Safety report series ;$vno. 58.”  Since it “thought” there was no 8XX for the second 490-1 an 8XX was created for it.  Unfortunately it was the first 490-1 that was missing a linking 8XX.

What is your practice regarding 8XX $x?  Since this is now an allowable subfield and we follow LC procedures, what will this do to your system?

Your feedback would be very welcome and much appreciated. Feel free to comment on this blog or talk about it on our Forum at:  http://ac.bslw.com/community/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34

Thanks,
Judy

Tags:, ,
Posted in MARC | Comments Closed

MARC8 and UTF8 – what does it mean?

Tuesday, August 25th, 2009

Last week we looked at the Anatomy of an Authority Record, but what if we look even deeper? Both Bibliographic and Authority records are essentially text, made up of characters formed either in MARC8 or UTF8. But what does that mean, and whats the difference?

MARC-8

The MARC-8 character set uses 8-bit characters, meaning it natively displays ASCII and ANSEL text. Because of the limitation of characters that this allows, the MARC-8 character set includes methods to extend the displayable characters. One method is to include both spacing base characters and nonspacing modifier characters (diacritics).

Spacing or nonspacing refers to cursor movement: a spacing character moves the cursor, a nonspacing character does not. A nonspacing character is always associated with a single spacing character, but multiple nonspacing characters may be associated with the same spacing character.

In MARC-8, when there is a nonspacing character, it precedes the associated spacing character: any cursor movement occurs after displaying the character. This method allows basic and extended Latin characters to be displayed using the default character set.

 Another method MARC-8 uses to extend the displayable characters is to use alternate character sets. This is done by using escape sequences, special character sequences containing codes to indicate which character set is being selected for display. Possible alternate sets include subscripts, superscripts, Hebrew, Cyrillic, Arabic, and Greek. Chinese, Japanese and Korean are also possible by this method using EACC character encodings for these characters. While this method allows for many additional characters to be used, it is still limited and somewhat burdensome.

 UTF-8

As computers needed to support a wider character set, many computer related companies formed a group to define the Unicode Standard. This standard is based on 16-bit characters. UTF-8 is a method of encoding these characters into sequences of from 1 to 3 bytes. Unicode, using the UTF-8 encoding, was accepted as an alternative character set for use in MARC records, with an initial limitation to using only the Unicode characters that have corresponding characters in the MARC-8 character set.

Decomposed

Unicode has definitions for nonspacing characters like MARC-8, except that the nonspacing character follows the character it modifies: cursor movement occurs before the character is displayed. Decomposed UTF-8 characters are similiar to MARC-8 diacritics, in which a base character is modified by one or more non-spacing characters. For example a base character ‘n’ with a non-spacing ‘~’ would combine to display ‘ñ’. Decomposed is also the current LC standard.

Precomposed

 Unicode also includes many precomposed characters. These are spacing characters that are the equivalent of one or more nonspacing characters and a spacing character. A precomposed ‘ñ’, instead of having a base character and an additional non-spacing diacritic mark would combine all those elements into one code which represents the character with the diacritic as a whole. This causes a more difficult normalization routine.

Normalization

To handle the various ways a composite character could be normalized, standardized normalization forms have been defined. These include NFD (Normalization Form Decomposed) and NFC (Normalization Form Composed). In NFD, every character that can be decomposed is converted to its most decomposed form following rules for canonical decomposition. In NFC, the characters are first decomposed as in NFD, then composed into precomposed (composite) forms following canonical rules.  This may result in the sequence of characters for a given character changing to an alternate, equivalent form.

Conclusion

Many library systems are moving from MARC-8 to UTF-8 character encodings. This is a good move because it gives you the ability to accurately reflect the data, while lessoning the possibility of error. Backstage Library Works can return data in MARC-8, or UTF-8 (decomposed or composed) form.

Tags:, , ,
Posted in MARC | Comments Closed

Always Load in Correct Order

Friday, March 20th, 2009

WHY IT’S A GOOD IDEA TO LOAD YOUR AUTHORITIES IN THE ORDER WE PROCESSED THEM

We have often had clients ask us in what order they should load their authorities, if they have several groups to load.  Perhaps you’ve found yourself in the situation where you haven’t loaded your last set of authority updates and now you’ve sent in new bibliographic records to be processed, or maybe your next scheduled update has arrived.  You find yourself looking at two or more batches of authorities and you wonder, “Does it really matter which goes first?”  Absolutely!  And here’s why:

 

    *  Say you had a scheduled authority update in December, but things went crazy busy and you haven’t had time to load those authorities yet.  Now it’s March and you have a large group of new bibliographic records that need processing, so you send them in.  Thinking you can save time by loading both the December updates and the bibliographic authorities at the same time, you wait for the new group to be returned.  But now … which to load first?  You should load the December updates first.  Example:

    *  You have a heading for Doe, John,$d1955-   and sometime last year LC updated that to Doe, John Joseph,$d1955- (and if we’re lucky, LC added the “old” heading as a 400 see-reference).  This changed authority would deliver with the December group you hadn’t loaded yet.

    *  Now you’ve sent in your bib records and in there is the heading for Doe, John,$d1955-  .  However, between December and today’s date LC decided to edit the record again and they put out a new authority with the new heading of: Doe, John J.,$d1955- (and still kept the original “old” heading of Doe, John,$d1955-  in a 400 see-reference tag).

    *  With the processed bibs you’d get back the very newest authority for Doe, John J.,$d1955-, which is what you’d want in your system.

    *  But if you decide to load the bibliographic records and associated authorities first and the December authority updates second, the middle version of Doe, John Joseph,$d1955-  (from the December updates) would overwrite the newest authority sent with the bibs, and you would be stuck with an older, not current LC version of this heading.

Which is why it’s always wisest to load oldest-to-newest, when you’re working with several projects at once.

Written by: Judy Archer

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Automated Authority Control, Bibliographic Records | Comments Closed

Understanding the MARC Structure

Monday, March 16th, 2009

Underneath the MARC records that we all know and love is a somewhat cryptic structure that tells our systems how to read the record. Luckily, this structure rarely gets corrupted, but when it does, it’s good to have a basic understanding of how to read and understand a MARC Format.

The MARC format is a text based format, meaning you can open it with a text editor. It is probably a good idea to only open a few (or only one!) record in a text editor, because it’s very difficult to read otherwise.

Every MARC record starts with a leader, the leader gives your system information about the record, including how big it is and what type of a record it is. Next is what is called a directory. Just like a normal directory, it tells you what tags are in it, and where the data for each tag is located.

This is how a leader is defined for a Bibliographic Record:

Leader: 

Position | Description              | Explination
------------------------------------------
00-04 | Record Length               = This is how long the record is
05    | Record Status               = Is the record new, changed or deleted
06    | Type of record              = Authority, Book, Computer file, etc.
07    | Bibliographic level         = Monograph/Serial/etc.
08    | Type of control             = Archival or not
09    | Character coding scheme     = MARC8 or UTF8
10    | Indicator count             = # of indicators each tag has
11    | Subfield code count         = # of subfield codes that make up 1 subfield
12-16 | Base address of data        = The byte where actual record data begins
17    | Encoding level              = Level of encoding/cataloging
18    | Descriptive cataloging form = AACR2
19    | Multipart resource record level = # (blank)
20    | Length of the length-of-field = # of bytes to store how long each tag is
21    | Length of the starting-character-position = # of bytes to store where tag begins
22    | Length of the implementation-defined portion = Rarely used
23    | Undefined                   = Not used

Looking at a leader can be confusing, but it’s also the only way to find some problems.

Here is an example record, as it may appear on your screen:
001 __ 3180021
005 __ 20050216201852.0
008 __ 040805s2005    nyu      b    001 0 eng 
010 __ ▼a  2004018260
020 __ ▼a0415971675 (alk. paper)
035 __ ▼a(DLC)  2004018260
040 __ ▼aDLC▼cDLC▼dDLC▼dCaONFJC▼dOrLoB-B
043 __ ▼an-us—
050 00 ▼aPS374.H56▼bO73 2004
082 00 ▼a813/.5409358▼222
090 __ ▼aPS374.H56▼bO73 2005
100 1_ ▼aOrbán, Katalin.
245 10 ▼aEthical diversions :▼bthe post-holocaust narratives of Pynchon, Abish, DeLillo, and Spiegelman /▼cKatalin Orbán.
260 __ ▼aNew York :▼bRoutledge,▼c2005.
300 __ ▼aix, 209 p. ;▼c24 cm.
440 _0 ▼aLiterary criticism and cultural theory
504 __ ▼aIncludes bibliographical references (p. 193-205) and index.
505 00 ▼gCh. 1.▼t”Mauschwitz” : monsters, memory, and testimony — ▼gCh. 2.▼tFamiliarity and forgetfulness in Walter Abish’s fiction — ▼gCh. 3.▼tPinpricks on the Ars(e) Narrandi : liminality and oven-games in Gravity’s rainbow.
600 10 ▼aPynchon, Thomas▼xKnowledge▼xHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945)
600 10 ▼aSpiegelman, Art▼xKnowledge▼xHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945)
600 10 ▼aAbish, Walter▼xKnowledge▼xHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945)
600 10 ▼aDeLillo, Don▼xKnowledge▼xHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945)
650 _0 ▼aAmerican fiction▼y20th century▼xHistory and criticism.
650 _0 ▼aHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945), in literature.
650 _0 ▼aJudaism and literature▼zUnited States▼xHistory▼y20th century.
650 _0 ▼aWorld War, 1939-1945▼zUnited States▼xLiterature and the war.
650 _0 ▼aEthics in literature.
650 _0 ▼aJews in literature.
852 0_ ▼bkr▼hPS374.H56▼iO73 2005
856 41 ▼3Table of contents▼uhttp://www.loc.gov/catdir/toc/ecip0421/2004018260.html
949 __ ▼aApproval▼b1628024-35▼c67.20▼d1▼i20027328▼jUSD▼tBook

Now, if we are to take a look at the actual MARC structure, it looks like this (when looking at an underlying MARC record, you may not be able to see all of the special characters like end of field and end of record marks, but they are there):

01872cam a2200397 a 450000100080000000500170000800800410002501000170006602000280008303500220011104000360013304300120016905000240018108200

210020509000240022610000210025024501180027126000340038930000250042344000430044850400640049150502240055560000620077960000

620084160000600090360000590096365000590102265000500108165000660113165000650119765000260126265000240128885200280131285600

7801340949005601418318002120050216201852.0040805s2005    nyu      b    001 0 eng    a  2004018260  a0415971675 (alk. paper)  a(DLC)  2004018260  aDLCcDLCdDLCdCaONFJCdOrLoB-B  an-us—00aPS374.H56bO73 200400a813/.5409358222  aPS374.H56bO73 20051 aOrbán, Katalin.10aEthical diversions :bthe post-holocaust narratives of Pynchon, Abish, DeLillo, and Spiegelman /cKatalin Orbán.  aNew York :bRoutledge,c2005.  aix, 209 p. ;c24 cm. 0aLiterary criticism and cultural theory  aIncludes bibliographical references (p. 193-205) and index.00gCh. 1.t”Mauschwitz” : monsters, memory, and testimony — gCh. 2.tFamiliarity and forgetfulness in Walter Abish’s fiction — gCh. 3.tPinpricks on the Ars(e) Narrandi : liminality and oven-games in Gravity’s rainbow.10aPynchon, ThomasxKnowledgexHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945)10aSpiegelman, ArtxKnowledgexHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945)10aAbish, WalterxKnowledgexHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945)10aDeLillo, DonxKnowledgexHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945) 0aAmerican fictiony20th centuryxHistory and criticism. 0aHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945), in literature. 0aJudaism and literaturezUnited StatesxHistoryy20th century. 0aWorld War, 1939-1945zUnited StatesxLiterature and the war. 0aEthics in literature. 0aJews in literature.0 bkrhPS374.H56iO73 2005413Table of contentsuhttp://www.loc.gov/catdir/toc/ecip0421/2004018260.html  aApprovalb1628024-35c67.20d1i20027328jUSDtBook

And here is a sample analysis of this record:

Leader: 

Position | Description              | Data
------------------------------------------
00-04 | Record Length               = 01872 : confirmend in a hex editor the record is this length
05    | Record Status               = c
06    | Type of record              = a
07    | Bibliographic level         = m
08    | Type of control             = # (blank)
09    | Character coding scheme     = a
10    | Indicator count             = 2
11    | Subfield code count         = 2
12-16 | Base address of data        = 00397 : confirmed in hex editor this is correct
17    | Encoding level              = # (blank)
18    | Descriptive cataloging form = a
19    | Multipart resource record level = # (blank)
20    | Length of the length-of-field portion = 4
21    | Length of the starting-character-position portion = 5
22    | Length of the implementation-defined portion = 0
23    | Undefined                   = 0
Directory: 

Tag | Field length | Starting character position
001 0008 00000
005 0017 00008
008 0041 00025
010 0017 00066
020 0028 00083
035 0022 00111
040 0036 00133
043 0012 00169
050 0024 00181
082 0021 00205
090 0024 00226
100 0021 00250
245 0118 00271
260 0034 00389
300 0025 00423
440 0043 00448
504 0064 00491
505 0224 00555
600 0062 00779
600 0062 00841
600 0060 00903
600 0059 00963
650 0059 01022
650 0050 01081
650 0066 01131
650 0065 01197
650 0026 01262
650 0024 01288
852 0028 01312
856 0078 01340
949 0056 01418| (56+1418 = 1474) 1474 = Ending field terminator below

Fields:
(For our convenience in readin the record we have replaced certain non-displayed fields with graphical representations)
| = field terminator (also used to terminate the directory)
$ = subfield code delimiter
^ = record terminator
_ = utf8 characters have been replaced by an undersore so the postions line up in a non-hex display

3180021|20050216201852.0|040805s2005    nyu      b    001 0 eng  |  $a  2004018260|  $a0415971675 (alk. paper)|  $a(DLC)  2004018260|  $aDLC$cDLC$dDLC$dCaONFJC$dOrLoB-B|  $an-us—|00$aPS374.H56$bO73 2004|00$a813/.5409358$222|  $aPS374.H56$bO73 2005|1 $aOrb__n, Katalin.|10$aEthical diversions :$bthe post-holocaust narratives of Pynchon, Abish, DeLillo, and Spiegelman /$cKatalin Orb__n.|  $aNew York :$bRoutledge,$c2005.|  $aix, 209 p. ;$c24 cm.| 0$aLiterary criticism and cultural theory|  $aIncludes bibliographical references (p. 193-205) and index.|00$gCh. 1.$t”Mauschwitz” : monsters, memory, and testimony — $gCh. 2.$tFamiliarity and forgetfulness in Walter Abish’s fiction — $gCh. 3.$tPinpricks on the Ars(e) Narrandi : liminality and oven-games in Gravity’s rainbow.|10$aPynchon, Thomas$xKnowledge$xHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945)|10$aSpiegelman, Art$xKnowledge$xHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945)|10$aAbish, Walter$xKnowledge$xHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945)|10$aDeLillo, Don$xKnowledge$xHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945)| 0$aAmerican fiction$y20th century$xHistory and criticism.| 0$aHolocaust, Jewish (1939-1945), in literature.| 0$aJudaism and literature$zUnited States$xHistory$y20th century.| 0$aWorld War, 1939-1945$zUnited States$xLiterature and the war.| 0$aEthics in literature.| 0$aJews in literature.|0 $bkr$hPS374.H56$iO73 2005|41$3Table of contents$uhttp://www.loc.gov/catdir/toc/ecip0421/2004018260.html|  $aApproval$b1628024-35$c67.20$d1$i20027328$jUSD$tBook|^

Ending field terminator    = 1474
Record terminator position = 1475

Summary
———————————
Ending field position = 1475
Base address of data  = 397

1475 + 397 = 1872 (Record Length)

Tags:,
Posted in Bibliographic Records | Comments Closed

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »