The 590 is indeed defined for local use, so whatever your local institution
uses it for should guide your mapping to MODS. There are some examples of
what it's used for on the OCLC Bibliographic Formats and Standards pages:
Frequently it's used as a note that is specific to a local copy of an item.
If your institution uses it inconsistently, you might want to just map it to
Karen D. Miller
Monographic/Digital Projects Cataloger
Bibliographic Services Dept.
Northwestern University Library
[log in to unmask]
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jon
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 11:07 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] MARCXML to MODS: 590 Field
I'm going to guess that it's because 59x fields are defined for local use:
...but someone from LC should be able to confirm.
Princeton, NJ 08544
Email: [log in to unmask]
On 05/19/2011 11:45 AM, Richard, Joel M wrote:
> Dear hive-mind,
> Does anyone know why the Library of Congress-supplied MARCXML to MODS XSLT
 does not handle the MARC 590 Local Notes field? It seems to handle
everything else, not that I've done an exhaustive search... :)
> Granted, I could copy/create my own XSLT and add this functionality in
myself, but I'm curious as to whether or not there's some logic behind this
decision to not include it. Logic that I would not naturally understand
since I'm not formally trained as a librarian.
>  http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/MARC21slim2MODS3-4.xsl
> Joel Richard
> IT Specialist, Web Services Department
> Smithsonian Institution Libraries | http://www.sil.si.edu/
> (202) 633-1706 | [log in to unmask]