008 Fixed-length data elements general information

[CECSpecialistI]

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

[dchen077]

I just added transformation notes for all of them! They should all have reproduction conditions and transform notes added now.

[lake44me]

@CECSpecialistI Form of Item "r" is a valid code describing the reproduction for records that meet the reproduction conditions (presence of 533) for Photocopy/Print on Demand reproductions https://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/mgd/mg-reproductionsPhotocopies.pdf . We are not getting specific about the content of the 533 here (let's see whether we need to when we get some output)) but it specifies that $a contains only "Print reproduction".

If a record meets one of the Reproduction Conditions but "Form of Item" contains a code that isn't specified in the PCC instructions (all of which are clearly intended to describe the reproduction rather than the original), then we are taking the approach that these are cloning mistakes, and therefore must apply to the original. "x" and "z" fall into that category. The transformation logic makes use of this generally (i.e. doesn't apply specifically to the code on that line). Note != means not equal to.

"If a Reproduction condition is present, AND if value != a, b, c, o, or r, apply mapping and transformation to OriginalM, not ReproM. - LA, DC 2024-09-12"

Does this make sense?

[cspayne]

@CECSpecialistI Form of Item "r" is a valid code describing the reproduction for records that meet the reproduction conditions (presence of 533) for Photocopy/Print on Demand reproductions https://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/mgd/mg-reproductionsPhotocopies.pdf . We are not getting specific about the content of the 533 here (let's see whether we need to when we get some output)) but it specifies that $a contains only "Print reproduction".

If a record meets one of the Reproduction Conditions but "Form of Item" contains a code that isn't specified in the PCC instructions (all of which are clearly intended to describe the reproduction rather than the original), then we are taking the approach that these are cloning mistakes, and therefore must apply to the original. "x" and "z" fall into that category. The transformation logic makes use of this generally (i.e. doesn't apply specifically to the code on that line). Note != means not equal to.

"If a Reproduction condition is present, AND if value != a, b, c, o, or r, apply mapping and transformation to OriginalM, not ReproM. - LA, DC 2024-09-12"

Does this make sense?

Yes this makes sense! Thank you.

[cspayne]

Hi @SitaKB Thank you for your answers to all of my questions.

I am still unclear on which dates I should code and which are only applicable to aggregates. Are 008/06 = i or k (inclusive dates of collection and range of years of bulk of collection) only for aggregate works?

[cspayne]

"The mappings on lines 924 (MUSIC) and 753 (MIXED MATERIALS) are the only 2 Form of Item “i” codes for Multimedia [OBSOLETE] that map to expression property https://rdaregistry.info/Elements/e/#P20001 "has content type”. Line 753 (MIXED MATERIALS) also maps Form of item “i” to http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/m/P30002 "has media type”. Line 428 (CONTINUING RESOURCES) and Line 184 (BOOKS) map Form of Item “i” to http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/m/P30001 "has carrier type.” Should they all map to manifestation for consistency?"

@SitaKB I think this is the only other outstanding question

@cspayne I think for music and mixed materials EXPRESSION was chosen for a reason.

[tmqdeborah]

Hi @SitaKB Thank you for your answers to all of my questions.

I am still unclear on which dates I should code and which are only applicable to aggregates. Are 008/06 = i or k (inclusive dates of collection and range of years of bulk of collection) only for aggregate works? @cspayne The 008/06 = i or k (inclusive dates of collection and range of years of bulk of collection) are only appropriate for Collection works (not Collection aggregate manifestations). Collection works (and Diachronic works) are also being 'pulled' for Phase I (in addition to Collection aggregates). So, these transforming these codes could wait until Phase II (unless transformation instructions are already available and correct) in which case you could just go ahead and do them.

[cspayne]

Hi @SitaKB, I am still confused about the dates 1 and 2 mappings. It appears that the mappings account for a value in date 1 or a value in date 2 or when both are blank, but I am not seeing a row for when there is a value in date 1 and date 2. Hi @cspayne You mean for multiple dates (m), value for date 1 and date 2 are missing. We forgot to add it then. I am also unclear on what the transformation notes mean, such as "[date1..date2] | u=blank | partial blank = fill in blanks as X" and "[date]/.. | u=blank" It is not clear to me what the date value should look like in RDA. Are you able to go through and clarify the mappings and transformation notes for these dates? Hi @cspayne This note for (q) questionable date means I think if blank then the value u (f.e.19uu) | when it is partial blank then the value X (f.e. 1920-19XX). I am also not sure.

[cspayne]

Hi @CECSpecialistI, @GordonDunsire , and @szapoun I took a look at meeting notes and found some about the 008 dates from November 23, 2022. Do you happen to remember why 008/06 = 'm' does not have a mapping for when both date1 and date2 are present?

[GordonDunsire]

@cspayne: I don't recall the discussion. I note that the code 'm' means two different things: dates of a diachronic manifestation, and date range of manufacture of a produced manifestation (artisanal, etc.). We are excluding diachronic manifestations, etc. from phase 1, so only the date range of manufacture is of interest, but that only makes sense if both dates have values; that is, if it is a valid date-based timespan. If either date is 'missing', the value is not a valid timespan; instead, it is an 'encyclopedic' statement: we know this took more than a year to paint before it first appeared in an exhibition, but we don't know how long.

If there is a separate condition for determining if the manifestation is produced (rather than published), then I think it is ok to output a concatenation of dates as 'date of production', but it is not ok when either date is blank or blanked.

[CECSpecialistI]

@SitaKB volunteered to add this mapping during meeting 2024-11-13

[SitaKB]

@cspayne I have added 008/06 =m to the mapping when both date1 and date2 are present.

[lake44me]

@SitaKB @cspayne If it's the line I think it is (currently 31), should the uncategorized note "edtf for time interval with unknown start " be changed to something else (maybe just "edtf for time interval")?
Minor niggling point - I was just checking that the reproduction condition was there (thank you Sita).

[SitaKB]

@lake44me You are right Laura. I didn't read the sentence properly. I have correted it. Thanks