Ron Davies wrote:
Has anybody ever seen a MARC record where the order of the field data
wasn't the same as that of the entries in the directory? I'm not
questioning the logic of reading a record using the field lengths and
offsets, just wondering if anybody had ever seen this occur in the wild.
At 16:58 7/05/2005, Andrew Houghton wrote:
The code is off the top of my head and parts have been copied from a
variety of Perl scripts I had hanging around. It isn't tested, but
hopefully a start for your work.
Thanks, Andy, there's a lot there that I can put to good use. Much more
elegant cod
erl.org
Subject: Re: Corrupt MARC records
> I wondered if any of you had run into similar problems, or if you had
> any thoughts on how to tackle this particular issue.
It's ironic that MARC::Record *used* to do what Andrew suggests: using
split() rather than
than substr() with the act
I wondered if any of you had run into similar problems, or if you had
any thoughts on how to tackle this particular issue.
It's ironic that MARC::Record *used* to do what Andrew suggests: using
split() rather than
than substr() with the actual directory lengths. The reason for the
switch was jus
e top of my head and not tested, didn't I? It's
still not test, but the above mistakes were obvious after reading what I sent...
Andy.
-Original Message-
From: Houghton,Andrew [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 10:58 AM
To: perl4lib@perl.org
Subject: RE: Cor
MARC records contain a field delimiter after each field and a record delimiter
at the end. Assuming that those delimiters are still in your MARC records and
that the directory entries are in the same order as the fields, then you can do
the following:
1 Set Perl's record delimiter to the MAR
