My last post in reply to Greg included a chunk of rather raw notes I took on the subject yesterday. I might as well send along the rest of the notes which are all exploring issues with the nitty gritty details of manifestation entity records for PG texts. You can ignore the BMF stuff. Take this all as food for thought rather than specific suggestions for PG. ** Series ,----[ ISBD(ER) 6.6.1 ] | 6.6.1 The numbering of the item within a series or sub-series is | given in the terms in which it appears in the item. Standard | abbreviations may be used. Arabic numerals are substituted for other | numerals or spelled-out numbers. e.g. | | - (Multimedia learning series ; vol. 2) | - (Visit Canada series ; vol. C) | - (Computer simulation games ; module 5) | - (BTS research report ; 2) `---- Steve's script give's us: 830 0|aProject Gutenberg|v9737 But the ISBD suggests something like this: (Project Gutenberg etext ; no. 8654) 830 0|a(Project Gutenberg etext ; |vno. 9737 or BMF: series : ($a[Project Gutenberg etext] ; no. $vol[9737]) ** Material Designation ,----[ ISBD(ER) Appendix C ] | **General material designation:** | Electronic resource | | **Resource designations with "electronic" in the designations:** | Electronic data | Electronic font data | Electronic image data | Electronic numeric data | Electronic census data | Electronic survey data | Electronic representational data | Electronic map data | Electronic sound data | Electronic text data | Electronic bibliographic database(s) | Electronic document(s) (e.g. letters, articles) Electronic journal(s) | Electronic newsletter(s) `---- For PG, this would then suggest changing the more general Electronic Resource to more specific: Electronic document Electronic sound data The reason I am suggesting this is that all of the examples I have seen using `Electronic resourece' are for things like interactive CDROMS, and dynamic Web sites. These are not specifically electronic texts, documents or sound recordings. The distinction is small and certainly the general `Electronic Resource' works, but I wanted to find out if there were more specific enumerated values for material designation.... ** Mode of Access Since we haven't gotten around to working on Instance/Item entities yet, this is a bit premature. Access fields are not used in Manifestation entities. But reading through the ISBD and MARC specs got me thinking about the issue. I must say that I don't like the ISBD(ER) mode of access field. Mode of access: Internet via World Wide Web. URL: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/callaloo/. This is needlessly verbose and redundent. Another example in the spec is a bit better. Mode of access: Internet. URL: http://mitpress.mit.edu/CityofBits/. But it's not much better. ,----[ ISBD(ER) 7.5.2 Notes relating to mode of access] | | Mode of access shall be recorded in a note for all remote access | electronic resources. | | Mode of access is given as the second note following the System | requirements note (see 7.5.1), if given, and is preceded by "Mode of | access" (or its equivalent in another language and/or script). In | the absence of a system requirements note, mode of access is given | as the first note. e.g. | | - Mode of access: Lexis system. Requires subscription to | Mead Data Central, Inc. | - Mode of access: World Wide Web. URL: http://www.un.org | - Mode of access: Internet via ftp://ftp.nevada.edu | - Mode of access: Gopher://gopher.peabody.yale.edu | - Mode of access: Computer university network | - Mode of access: Mikenet `---- On the whole, MARC and ISBD are a bit clumsy when it comes to networked resources--the records are basically electronic catalog cards. Numbers 2,3 and 4 are all network addresses, which have a URL pointing to the resource. I can understand putting a label indicating the type of network protocol but the examples are all screwed up mixing descriptive labels for the protocol with the type of network. Better would be something like the following: - access: Lexis [dialup network]: Note: Requires subscription to Mead Data Central, Inc. - access: Project Gutenberg (WWW site): URL: http://projectgutenberg.org - access: Project Gutenberg (FTP mirror): URL: ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org - access: Internet (FTP site): URL: ftp://ftp.nevada.edu - access: Internet (Gopher site): URL: gopher://gopher.peabody.yale.edu - access: UCLA (university intranet): URL: http://libary.ucla.edu:2080 Note: Requires university network account. - access: Mikenet (private local area network) in BMF access: - $a[$typ:dialup $l:Lexis (dialup network)]: Note: $not[Requires subscription to Mead Data Central, Inc.] - $a[$typ:www $l:Project Gutenberg (WWW site): URL: $url[http://projectgutenberg.org] - $a[$typ:ftp $l:Project Gutenberg (FTP mirror)]: URL: $url[ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org] - $a[$typ:ftp $l:Internet (FTP site)]: URL: $url[ftp://ftp.nevada.edu] - $a[$typ:gopher $l:Internet (Gopher site)]: URL: $url[gopher://gopher.peabody.yale.edu] - $a[$typ:intranet $l:UCLA (university intranet)]: URL: $url[http://libary.ucla.edu:2080] Note: Requires university network account. - $a[$typ:lan $l:Mikenet] ($not[private local area network]) Now what about MARC? Steve's script produces: 856 40|uhttp://www.gutenberg.org/etext/9737 856 42|uhttp://www.gutenberg.org/license|3Rights and the spec sez... ,----[ MARC: 856 Electronic Location and Access ] | Field 856 contains the information needed to locate and access an | electronic resource. The field may be used in a bibliographic record | for a resource when that resource or a subset of it is available | electronically. In addition, it may be used to locate and access an | electronic version of a non-electronic resource described in the | bibliographic record or a related electronic resource. `---- This breaks down to: *** Indicators First: 4 HTTP Second: 0 Resource 2 Related Resource *** Subfields $u URI (do they make a distinction between URI and URL?) $3 Materials specified. -- Brad Collins <brad@chenla.org>, Bangkok, Thailand