Thanks a lot Richard,

So I guess my patch could be ported to the source code of ruby-marc,

Let me know if interested,

James

2011/5/19 Richard, Joel M <[log in to unmask]>

> I'm no MARC expert, but I've learned enough to say that yes, this is valid
> in that what you're seeing is the $q (Electronic format type) and $u
> (Uniform Resource Identifier ) subfields of the 856 field.
>
> http://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/8xx/856.shtm
>
> You'll see other things when you get multiple authors (creators) on an item
> or multiple anythings that can occur more than once.
>
> --Joel
>
> Joel Richard
> IT Specialist, Web Services Department
> Smithsonian Institution Libraries | http://www.sil.si.edu/
> (202) 633-1706 | [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
> On May 19, 2011, at 12:37 PM, James Lecard wrote:
>
> > I'm using ruby-marc ruby parser (v.0.4.2) to parse some marc files I get
> > from a partner.
> >
> > The 856 field is splitted over 2 lines, causing the ruby library to
> ignore
> > it (I've patched it to overcome this issue) but I want to know if this
> kind
> > of marc is valid ?
> >
> > =LDR  00638nam  2200181uu 4500
> > =001  cla-MldNA01
> > =008  080101s2008\\\\\\\|||||||||||||||||fre||
> > =040  \\$aMy Provider
> > =041  0\$afre
> > =245  10$aThis Subject
> > =260  \\$aParis$bJ. Doe$c2008
> > =490  \\$aSome topic
> > =650  1\$aNarratif, Autre forme
> > =655  \7$abook$2lcsh
> > =752  \\$aA Place on earth
> > =776  \\$dParis: John Doe and Cie, 1973
> > =856  \2$qtext/html
> > =856  \\$uhttp://www.this-link-will-not-be-retrieved-by-ruby-marc-library
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > James L.
>