Hi, On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Smith,Devon <smit...@oclc.org> wrote: > I think it's a mistake to get hung up on the leader being "next to" the > fields or the indicators being "next to" the subfields. The leader and > indicators aren't really different than fields and subfields. They were > given special treatment in ISO 2709 due to the limitations of ISO 2709. > If we're moving forward, we shouldn't pull those anachronistic > distinctions forward with us.
Well, code that is working with MARC qua MARC does have to deal with the distinctions, so even though I agree with your point about the leader being effectively just another fixed field and the indicators being effectively just subfields, I prefer having the bit of syntactical sugar that MARC-in-JSON provides. That said, my main preference is that we not unnecessarily multiply the number of JSON representations of MARC in actual use. Regards, Galen -- Galen Charlton gmcha...@gmail.com
