On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 10:50:22PM -0600, Chuck Bearden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 07:50:39PM -0600, Ed Summers wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 08:11:39PM -0500, Morbus Iff wrote:
MARC::Field-new('100','1','', a='Logan, Robert K.', d='1939-'),
Anne L. Highsmith says:
Quoting from MARC 21 Specifications for Record Structure,
Character Sets, and Exchange Media RECORD STRUCTURE,
http://www.loc.gov/marc/specifications/specrecstruc.html#varifields
Indicators may be any ASCII lowercase alphabetic, numeric, or blank
So, if that's the case,
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 07:43:52AM -0500, Morbus Iff wrote:
The LC also uses $ to represent sub-tags (I think that's what
they're called; just woke up... the $a/$b things). But, I
seem to see _a and _b more often. Which is more prevalent?
LC's MARCMaker/MARCBreaker utilities use $ if I
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 11:50:05AM -0500, Morbus Iff wrote:
Has anyone encountered targeted spam from perl4lib or oss4lib posts?
I've posted numerous times to perl4lib, and once to oss4lib. Just now,
I suddenly got a spam for BowkerLink, which submits to Ulrich's
Periodicals Directory,
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 09:16:20AM +0100, Tajoli Zeno wrote:
Hi to all,
At 01.52 19/11/03, Morbus Iff wrote:
[...]
Is that something anyone would be interested in? I suspect there are a huge
amount of problems with the approach (most prominently that the idea of
using tag numbers was to
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 07:43:52AM -0500, Morbus Iff wrote:
The OCLC conventions are probably much more widely known than the LC
ones simply because most libraries doing copy cataloging use OCLC as
their utility.
The LC also uses $ to represent sub-tags (I think that's what
they're called;
