Michael Borries michael.borr...@mail.cuny.edu wrote:
At this point is it considered necessary in fields 336-338 to use both
subfield $a with the term spelled out and also subfield $b with the code, or
is subfield $a with the term spelled out sufficient? I seem to see both
usages in various
Dear collective wisdom,
My apologies, because I believe this has been asked and answered before, but I
cannot find the relevant emails.
At this point is it considered necessary in fields 336-338 to use both subfield
$a with the term spelled out and also subfield $b with the code, or is
Michael Borries asked:
At this point is it considered necessary in fields 336-338 to use both subf=
ield $a with the term spelled out and also subfield $b with the code ...
SLC considers having both to be redundant. We will use $aterms in
336-338, but $4codes for relators.
That's a tad
If you are using OCLC Connexion, there is a macro to supply these fields
and it supplies both the term and code in $a and $b. So that is one
reason you are seeing both in many records. LC's policy for its
catalogers (see DCM B.13.13.2) is to record the term in $a, but if $b is
present in
4 matches
Mail list logo