MARC Advisory Committee - ALA Midwinter, Philadelphia, PA January 24-28, 2020

The MARC Advisory Committee (MAC) met twice during the Midwinter conference in Philadelphia to review two proposals and seven discussion papers that were on their agenda. None of these discussion papers or proposals were put forward by ARLIS/NA, and only a few dealt directly with artistic or creative practice directly, while much of the Discussion Papers dealt with assisting crosswalks between BIBFRAME and MARC and should be of at least general interest to the art, design, and architecture cataloging communities.

This proposal puts forward a way to capture metadata provenance information in the MARC formats from fully or partially machine-generated metadata to any type of metadata, including human-generated metadata. The proposal was passed unanimously with minor editorial changes to reflect the field can hold more than a binary regarding machine generated metadata. The changes will be applicable to 883 in all five MARC formats and the name of the field will reflect the broader scope.

The proposal adds subfield $0 (Authority record control number or standard number) to fields in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format that currently do not have subfield $0 defined: Field 310 (Current Publication Frequency) and Field 321 (Former Publication Frequency). After far too much conversation at the first meeting, and the expectation that it would need to be reworked and come back at Annual, this proposal was brought back in our second meeting and passed with one opposed and one abstaining. There is concern in the serials community that there will be opportunities for poor application and poor mechanical mapping, but the proposal is needed for LC BIBFRAME to MARC crosswalks and it will be on LC to do the mapping of data with care ...

This paper considered options for the modernization of the existing 856 field and/or the definition of a new field 857; a new subfield $e to account for access, use, and reproduction information; and the possibility of reassigning the existing subfield $7 for access status. Will likely return as a proposal at Annual.

This paper proposed adding subfield $0 (Authority record control number or standard number) to fields in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format that currently do not have subfield $0 defined: Field 504 (Bibliography, etc. Note) and Field 525 (Supplement Note). Revised definitions for each field were suggested in the discussion, as well as consternation about putting fixed vocabularies in fields that have traditionally been free text fields.

This paper proposes adding new repeatable subfields to Field 340 (Physical Medium) in the MARC21 Bibliographic Format to record the illustrative content and sound content of resources. While this could have applicability to ARLIS members, the focus of the paper was for mapping data between BIBFRAME and MARC, with primary consideration of moving image data. There was a general sense of support within MAC, but there was a sense that there was a need for more granularity. This could have implications for our communities and we should make sure it comes back as an appropriate proposal when it returns.

This paper proposes renaming field 345 from "Projection Characteristics of Moving Image" to "Moving Image Characteristics" and adding new repeatable subfields to record the aspect ratio and motion technique of resources. There was general support for this to move forward as a proposal.

This paper proposes the reinstatement of Field 241 (Transliterated Title) with updated indicators, subfields, and a revised field definition and scope. This is being proposed for the mapping of BIBFRAME to MARC, but could benefit the members of ARLIS looking for different ways to account for bibliographic information. There was general support for this to move forward as a proposal.

This paper describes defining a new field to accommodate Resource Description and Access "Manifestation Statements" in the MARC 21 Bibliographic format. This discussion paper came out of a new MARC/RDA Working Group that was formed in December of 2019 to evaluate the scope and impact of the extensions to RDA arising from the RDA 2019 revision in relation to MARC 21. This working group will be meeting routinely to identify and prioritize possible changes to MARC 21 to support compatibility with the RDA extensions and ensure effective data exchange into the future. The first proposals from this working group are scheduled to be presented at ALA Annual, along with more discussion papers. ARLIS should actively follow the developments of this working group to ensure our needs and issues are appropriately addressed.

This paper discusses the potential for encoding the new RDA element "extension plan" in the MARC Bibliographic and Authority formats. There was general support for this to move forward as a proposal as most communities saw a need for this.

ALA has announced that Annual, was to be held in Chicago at the end of June, is cancelled to the response to COVID-9, so stay tuned about how MAC will address the business that would have normally happened there.

Submitted by: John Maier, ARLIS/NA Liaison to MAC