Why don't systems use the 900 fields for local stuff like this? That's what
they're there for, right?
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Steve Oberg <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> This is definitely not a feature of MARC but rather a feature of your local
> ILS (Aleph 500). Those are local fields for which you'd need to make a
> translation to a standard MARC field if you wanted to move that information
> to another system that is based on MARC.
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 2:20 PM, Eric Lease Morgan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > Are alpha characters used for field names valid in MARC records?
> > When we do dumps of MARC records our ILS often dumps them with FMT and
> > field names. So not only do I have glorious 246 fields and 100 fields but
> > also have CAT fields and FMT fields. Are these features of my ILS --
> > extensions of the standard -- or really a part of MARC? Moreover, does
> > something like Marc4J or MARC::Batch and friends deal with these alpha
> > names correctly?
> > --
> > Eric Lease Morgan