Hi,
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Dueber, William dueb...@umich.edu wrote:
Note that as of this point, the marc-in-json spec goes as high as the
Record object. A set of records could be represented by, say, the obvious
JSON-array of Record objects (which may necessitate a JSON pull-parser
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Paul Hoffman nkui...@nkuitse.com wrote:
IMO this belongs in a separate module, not in MARC::Batch or
MARC::Record. Small pieces, loosely joined!
MARC::Record and MARC::Batch are frameworks that invoke
MARC::File::USMARC (and MARC::File::JSON and
When I wrote Data::Pairs (http://search.cpan.org/dist/Data-Pairs/), I had
JSONified MARC in mind. To my mind, a data structure that is a Pairs
of Pairs[2] would faithfully represent a MARC record, including preserving
the orders of fields/subfields.
Below is the short example from [1] displayed
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Brad Baxter b...@mail.libs.uga.edu wrote:
that those algorithms might be the basis for a similar JSON library.
I meant, javascript library.
I like the fact that it's slightly less verbose, but am put off by the fact
that it mixes different semantic entities in the same arrays. The leader is
next to the fields; the indicators are next to the subfields. E.g., in the
variable field:
{ 010 :
[
{ ind1: },
{ ind2: },
On 1/18/11 10:15 AM, Smith,Devon smit...@oclc.org wrote:
But other than that, 6 of one, half dozen of another ...
Agreed. I don't see where any of these are a ton better than others, with the
caveat that there's already code in ruby-marc, marc4j, and PHP's FIle_MARC for
the marc-in-json and
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
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 09:09:59AM -0500, Galen Charlton wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Paul Hoffman nkui...@nkuitse.com wrote:
IMO this belongs in a separate module, not in MARC::Batch or
MARC::Record. Small pieces, loosely joined!
MARC::Record and MARC::Batch are
