007 Physical Description Fixed Field General Information

[CECSpecialistI]

https://github.com/uwlib-cams/MARC2RDA/blob/main/Working%20Documents/00X.csv

[SitaKB]

@CECSpecialistI @lake44me @AdamSchiff @gerontakos @JianPLee @junghaelee I wonder what the RDA property is for 'category of material' in 007 field. 007 is a physical description fixed field. Is the information at manifestation level only? RDA property Category of manifestation?

[SitaKB]

Note about TAG 006 and 007. Not all MARC records have a 006 and 007 field. I have gone through the 007 list. I couldn't find a proper RDA-element for the following category of material: Motion picture (007/00=m 09 - Production elements 13 - Refined categories of color 14 - Kind of color stock or print 15 - Deterioration stage 16 - Completeness 17-22 - Film inspection date

Remote-sensing image (007/00=r) 03 - Altitude of sensor 04 - Attitude of sensor 05 - Cloud cover 06 - Platform construction type 07 - Platform use category 08 - Sensor type 09-10 - Data type

Can somebody help me with this? @CECSpecialistI @lake44me @junghaelee

[CECSpecialistI]

@junghaelee knows more than I do about motion picture cataloging. I will take a look at these later today and see if I can find any appropriate properties to assign.

[junghaelee]

In fact, I usually catalog videorecordings and have never cataloged motion pictures...

[CECSpecialistI]

Oops! Sorry @junghaelee

[lake44me]

Looking at Motion Picture byte 09 Production elements No fit for these terms in any cataloging vocabulary I could find that seemed possible, at id.loc.gov .

There is this:

rdam:P30335 | "has category of manifestation"

Instructions say, Condition: None of the terms in a vocabulary encoding scheme is appropriate or sufficiently specific. Option: Record an appropriate uncontrolled term as an unstructured description.

BUT: How do we feel about the Open Metadata Registry? http://metadataregistry.org/concept/list/vocabulary_id/244.html

I'm looking and they've got a lot of concept lists from MARC 007 and other places. This one was last updated in 2011. Can we rely on it being up to date? (There are RSS feeds for changes to these vocabularies).

Apologies if there's something about Open Metadata Registry in the instructions -- I didn't notice if so. There's a button for RDF that presumably would supply the few properties in relation to the URI for a value - but it doesn't show in a browser, it tries to download. I downloaded one and this is what it looks like:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding = "UTF-8"?> <rdf:RDF xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:reg="http://metadataregistry.org/uri/profile/regap/" xmlns:skos="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#">

<skos:ConceptScheme rdf:about="http://marc21rdf.info/terms/motionpicturepro#">
    <dc:title>MARC21-007: Production elements of motion picture</dc:title>
</skos:ConceptScheme>

<skos:Concept rdf:about="http://marc21rdf.info/terms/motionpicturepro#e" xml:lang="en">
  <skos:inScheme rdf:resource="http://marc21rdf.info/terms/motionpicturepro#"/>
  <reg:status rdf:resource="http://metadataregistry.org/uri/RegStatus/1001"/>
  <reg:identifier rdf:resource="http://metadataregistry.org/concepts/4209"/>
  <skos:prefLabel xml:lang="en">mixing tracks</skos:prefLabel>
  <skos:definition xml:lang="en">Separate sound tracks that are combined for the final film sound track.</skos:definition>
  <skos:notation xml:lang="en">e</skos:notation>
</skos:Concept>

<skos:Concept rdf:about="http://metadataregistry.org/uri/RegStatus/1001">
    <skos:prefLabel xml:lang="en">Published</skos:prefLabel>
</skos:Concept>

</rdf:RDF>

Useful?

If so, here's the whole list: http://www.marc21rdf.info/

[CECSpecialistI]

I couldn't find anything in RDA either. It seems that we have a choice between an unstructured description or an outside ontology. The metadata registry idea is a good one, but it seems to me that it may not be as well maintained as we'd like. It's also technically not LRM/RDA/RDF, so would need a "loss" status, right? Should we fall back on the metadata registry when no appropriate properties exist in the RDA Registry? That's a question for the RSC. It seems that RSC members are also the ones who created a lot of the MARC-related element sets.

[CECSpecialistI]

was this closed on purpose? @cspayne is this in the transform?

[cspayne]

was this closed on purpose? @cspayne is this in the transform?

No, it is not. I have re-opened the issue.

[cspayne]

Hi @SitaKB! I'm looking at the mapping for 007 and I see that there are both '?' and 'first pass' rows. It looks like some of the conditions (such as character position 00 code value 'c') have multiple rows with different mappings, but the status differs between '?' and 'first pass'. I am hoping to review and update this mapping to add the 007 vocabulary IRIs that UW has created for these values, but I wanted to check whether I should be looking at the '?' or 'first pass' section, or whether I should be reviewing both? Thank you!

[SitaKB]

@cspayne You should review both (? and first pass)