Sorry - addressing the actual question, rather than the one in my head, the 856 field "is also repeated when more than one access method is used” - so my reading is you should be doing both:

856 40 $uhttp://example.com
856 70 $uhttps://example.com$2https

Owen

Owen Stephens
Owen Stephens Consulting
Web: http://www.ostephens.com
Email: [log in to unmask]
Telephone: 0121 288 6936

> On 18 Aug 2015, at 00:00, Owen Stephens <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> In theory the 1st indicator dictates the protocol used and 4 =HTTP. However, in all examples on http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd856.html, despite the indicator being used, the protocol part of the URI it is then repeated in the $u field.
> 
> You can put ‘7’ in the 1st indicator, then use subfield $2 to define other methods.
> 
> Since only ‘http’ is one of the preset protocols, not https, I guess in theory this means you should use something like
> 
> 856 70 $uhttps://example.com$2https
> 
> I’d be pretty surprised if in practice people don’t just do:
> 
> 856 40 $uhttps://example.com
> 
> Owen
> 
> 
> Owen Stephens
> Owen Stephens Consulting
> Web: http://www.ostephens.com
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Telephone: 0121 288 6936
> 
>> On 17 Aug 2015, at 21:41, Stuart A. Yeates <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> 
>> I'm in the middle of some work which includes touching the 856s in lots of
>> MARC records pointing to websites we control. The websites are available on
>> both https://example.org/ and http://example.org/
>> 
>> Can I put //example.org/ in the MARC or is this contrary to the standard?
>> 
>> Note that there is a separate question about whether various software
>> systems support this, but that's entirely secondary to the question of the
>> standard.
>> 
>> cheers
>> stuart
>> --
>> ...let us be heard from red core to black sky
>