On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 2:31 PM, MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
"Joshua Ferraro" <jmf@liblime.com> wrote:
As Koha popularity expands, we should consider switching to the 'de facto' standard for items data (949). The need was brought to my attention recently on an OCLC list where it was discovered that OCLC uses 952 for internal codes, and therefore, it can't be exported. So libraries using OCLC for cataloging, who want to manually add their items data to their records, download them from OCLC, and them upload into Koha, will have to use another tag for items data.
In my opinion, most "de facto" standards aren't worth the paper they're not written on. So, I ask:- Normally, I'd 100% agree, but this is one time I think we should consider it.
1. What other systems are using 949 for items? That I know of: Horizon, Unicorn, VTLS, Innovative Interfaces, TLC and Aleph; I'm sure there are others.
2. Aren't all 9xx tags local use? http://www.loc.gov/marc/specifications/specrecstruc.html#local Yes ...
3. Could an OCLC-MARC/Koha-MARC filter achieve the same thing? No, the problem is specifically that OCLC doesn't allow export of 952 fields, so the user must store items data in another tag if they want to export from OCLC. This could be done as a local customization for this one user by simply altering their frameworks, but it reveals a underlying assumption that most ILSes and bibliographic organizations have: that items are in the 949.
Cheers, -- Joshua Ferraro SUPPORT FOR OPEN-SOURCE SOFTWARE CEO migration, training, maintenance, support LibLime Featuring Koha Open-Source ILS jmf@liblime.com |Full Demos at http://liblime.com/koha |1(888)KohaILS _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@lists.koha.org http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel