[426] in ad-lib
PLEASE READ - New 949
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric Celeste)
Wed Apr 26 02:03:03 1995
To: ad-cat@MIT.EDU
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 02:02:48 EDT
From: Eric Celeste <efc@MIT.EDU>
Since the 949 will be used by the Expansion Table to generate 852
tags, I recommend that we scrap our current subfielding practice in the
949 and adopt the same subfield designations as found in the 852.
The fact that the current 949l and and 949m have no direct corrolation in
the Advance means we will have to revamp the 949 anyway. Since we are
confusing people in the short run we might as well clear things up in the
long run. Using the same subfields will make it easier to explain to new
staff (and ourselves) just what is going on.
Since our Institution code on Advance will always be MIT, we donUt ever
have to use the 949a to define the Institution code; this conviently
leaves the 949a available for the Expansion Table code. The new 949 would
look like this:
Old New Description
a a Expansion Table code (usually fills in * fields)
l b * Sub-location
l c * Collection
j,i,n g Preservation note (used for holdings and notes)
s h * Classification (MIT uses for whole call #)
n/a i * Cutter (not usually used by MIT)
n/a j * Accession number (not usually used by MIT)
l k * Call number prefix
b p Barcode
c t Copy number
v,z v Enumeration
m x * Circ code
n/a z * Call number suffix
Any references to the 949 tag in the Expansion Table specification refer
to the new 949 here proposed for Advance.
