Using "--" before subfields $v, $x, $y, and $z should work well for
all the standard MARC 6XX fields.
The only exception might be in any locally-defined fields 690-699.
Keith
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Jonathan Rochkind <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Thanks! So $v, $x, $y, and $z should always get a "--" before them --
> that's sufficient logic to do it 'right'? I guess an LCSH 6xx always needs
> an $a first, so I don't need to worry about if a $v or $x happens to come
> first, and shouldn't get a preceding "--".
>
> Should I do this only for 6xx with 2nd indicator 2 indicating LCSH, or do
> people generally just do this for all 6xx?
>
> Tod Olson wrote:
>>
>> Only for certain subfields:
>>
>> Dash (-) that precedes a subdivision in an extended 600 subject heading
>> is not carried in the MARC record. It may be system generated as a display
>> constant associated with the content of subfield $v, $x, $y, and $z.
>>
>> From http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd600.html
>>
>> -Tod
>>
>> On Sep 23, 2009, at 9:09 AM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Hi all, I'm writing some marc record display code, and I have a question
>>> about the 'right' way to display LCSH headings.
>>>
>>> LCSH headings are typically displayed with "--" between components. But
>>> looking at the MARC, it looks like the "--" punctuation isn't actually in
>>> the MARC field. (A rare instance where display punctuation isn't in the
>>> marc!).
>>>
>>> Is it correct for any LCSH 6xx field (which you know because the 2nd
>>> indicator is 0, right?), to add "--" between ALL present subfields on
>>> display? Do I have the right logic there?
>>>
>>> Thanks for any advice!
>>>
>>> Jonathan
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
