> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Bill Dueber
> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 12:30 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Q: XML2JSON converter
> 
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Houghton,Andrew <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> 
> > Too bad I didn't attend code4lib.  OCLC Research has created a
> version of
> > MARC in JSON and will probably release FAST concepts in MARC binary,
> > MARC-XML and our MARC-JSON format among other formats.  I'm wondering
> > whether there is some consensus that can be reached and standardized
> at LC's
> > level, just like OCLC, RLG and LC came to consensus on MARC-XML.
> >  Unfortunately, I have not had the time to document the format,
> although it
> > fairly straight forward, and yes we have an XSLT to convert from
> MARC-XML to
> > MARC-JSON.  Basically the format I'm using is:
> >
> >
> The stuff I've been doing:
> 
>   http://robotlibrarian.billdueber.com/new-interest-in-marc-hash-json/
> 
> ... is pretty much the same, except:

I decided to stick closer to a MARC-XML type definition since its would be easier to explain how the two specifications are related, rather than take a more radical approach in producing a specification less familiar.  Not to say that other approaches are bad, they just have different advantages and disadvantages.  I was going for simple and familiar.

I certainly would be will to work with LC on creating a MARC-JSON specification as I did in creating the MARC-XML specification.


Andy.