I strongly oppose using any HTML mark-up in MARC records - this should
be the domain of the OPAC to render things appropriately. URIs for
images are fine, but is subfield z appropriate as well? I'd be
inclined to use a subfield 9 since it's purposely designed for local
use.
Mark A. Matienzo
Applications Developer, Digital Experience Group
The New York Public Library
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Doran, Michael D<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Is anybody else embedding HTML mark-up code in MARC records [1]? We're currently including an "<img>" tag in some MARC Holdings records in the 856z [2]. I'm inclined to think that HTML mark-up does not belong anywhere in MARC records, but am looking for other opinions (preferably with the reasoning behind the opinions), both pro and con.
>
> I'm asking on code4lib as well as the voyager-l list in order to get a mix of ILS-specific and ILS-agnostic opinions (I'm not on any cataloging lists, or would probably ask there, too). I tried googling this topic, but couldn't find anything of consequence; so if I've missed something there, and you could point me to it, I'd be obliged.
>
> -- Michael
>
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML
>
> [2] http://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/hd856.html
>
> # Michael Doran, Systems Librarian
> # University of Texas at Arlington
> # 817-272-5326 office
> # 817-688-1926 mobile
> # [log in to unmask]
> # http://rocky.uta.edu/doran/
>
|
