On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 10:32:51AM +0100, Ron Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The reason is that according to the > MARC format, fields within a record are supposed to be grouped by block > (hundred groups). That means that fields may not necessarily be in tag order. > > It's true a 001 will probably always appear before a 099, but in the 6XX > block at least, the sequence of fields can be significant. Unfortunately there's nothing in MARC to guarantee the unchangeable sequencing of fields and some utilities will rearrange them. Therefore any significance in sequence may well be lost. > > On the issue of alpha and numeric tags, I know that alpha values in tags > have been permitted in the MARC standard for a long time, and applaud the > fact that MARC::Record allows for it, but has anyone actually seen one > used? Danmarc recommends combined alpha and numeric tags for local tags, and I recall seeing them in another Scandinavian format. Colin
-- Colin Campbell Technical Services Consultant Sirsi Ltd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
