Closed nichtich closed 1 year ago
Example notation 787.219369 (from documentation of field 765)
PICA+:
045H/10 $eDDC23ger$a787.219369$c787.2$d784-788:18-19$d784.19369$Acoli-ana
The current mapping to PICA is wrong (#44) this should be:
045H/10 $eDDC23ger$a787.219369$c787.2$d784-788:1$d784.19369$Acoli-ana
MARC (repeated for each step with the number being analyzed in $u
: PICA $a
= MARC $u
)
765 1# $b787.2$a784 $c788$w784$c788 $t1$u787.219369
765 1# $b787.21$a784 $c788$v18$c19 $r784.1$s9369$u787.219369
Relevant steps from coli-ana:
787.219369
787.2----- base number 787.2 (MARC $b = PICA $c)
---------- 784 (first MARC field: where instructions are found)*
---.-1---- 784-788:1 (first MARC field)
---.-19--- 784-788:18-19 (second MARC field: where instructions are found)*
---.--9369 784.19369 (second MARC field)
It looks like MARC contains information where a rule is found, not what* kind of rule has been applied. We don't always have this information in coli-ana.
Requires at least #22.
See MARC Field 765 (classification format) and MARC Field 085 (bibliographic format).