From the MARC documentation [1]:
"Field 856 is repeated when the location data elements vary (the URL in subfield
$u or subfields $a, $b, $d, when used). It is also repeated when more than one
access method is used, different portions of the item are available
electronically, mirror sites are recorded, different formats/resolutions with
different URLs are indicated, and related items are recorded."
So it looks like however the URL is handled, a single 856 field should be used
to indicate the location [2]. I am not familiar enough with MARC to say how it
"should" have been done, but it looks like $q and $u would probably be
sufficient (if they're in the same line).
However, since the field is repeatable, the parser shouldn't be choking on it,
unless it's choking on it for a sophisticated reason (e.g., "These aren't the
subfield tags I expect to be seeing"). It also looks like if $u is provided, the
first subfield should indicate access method (in this case "4" for HTTP). Maybe
that's what's causing the problem? [3]
Anyway, I think having these two parts of the same URL data on separate lines is
definitely Not Right, but I am not sure if it adds up to invalid MARC.
-dre.
[1] http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd856.html
[2] I am not a cataloger. Don't hurt me.
[3] I am not an expert on MARC ingest or on ruby-marc. I could be wrong.
On 5/19/2011 12:37 PM, James Lecard wrote:
I'm using ruby-marc ruby parser (v.0.4.2) to parse some marc files I get
from a partner.
The 856 field is splitted over 2 lines, causing the ruby library to ignore
it (I've patched it to overcome this issue) but I want to know if this kind
of marc is valid ?
=LDR 00638nam 2200181uu 4500
=001 cla-MldNA01
=008 080101s2008\\\\\\\|||||||||||||||||fre||
=040 \\$aMy Provider
=041 0\$afre
=245 10$aThis Subject
=260 \\$aParis$bJ. Doe$c2008
=490 \\$aSome topic
=650 1\$aNarratif, Autre forme
=655 \7$abook$2lcsh
=752 \\$aA Place on earth
=776 \\$dParis: John Doe and Cie, 1973
=856 \2$qtext/html
=856 \\$uhttp://www.this-link-will-not-be-retrieved-by-ruby-marc-library
Thanks,
James L.
