 |
 |
On Sep 23, 2009, at 9:19 AM, Jonathan Rochkind 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? Our ancient hardcopy MARC 21 manual says the dash preceding any of those subfields is a display constant, and there is no mention of indicator-based display logic. So no need to worry about the indicators. I suspect this is ISBD punctuation. If so, it's probably the only ISBD punctuation that is, sensibly, not carried in the data. On Sep 23, 2009, at 9:20 AM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: > Hey, and it occurs to me, in an HTML display, it might be better to > use an actual em-dash than the traditional two hyphens too? Since > the LC documentation just talks about "dash" -- two hyphens is how > you approximate an em-dash in ascii of course, but we're not living > in ascii anymore! In fact, the old MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data print manual uses the em-dash. I would agree that the "--" is legacy, probably from the days of printing cards on impact printers with the old Library of Congress print train. If you go for the em-dash, it will be interesting to see how long it takes for someone complain about the change from the double dashes. -Tod > 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 >>> >> >>