On Jul 30, 2004, at 8:56 AM, Eric Lease Morgan wrote:
Besides the fact that the addition of a field named SYS may be a
"feature" of my integrated library system, how can I add such a field
to my data?
Well, now the whole thing is a moot point in my book. Instead of using
a "kewl" SYS field in my
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 12:32:49PM -0500, Harvey Hahn wrote:
> Although in *THEORY* both alphabetic and numeric characters could be used in
> tags in a locally-defined MARC format, the currently defined five MARC
> formats in use by libraries (bibliographic, authority, holdings,
> classification da
At 08:59AM on 08/02/04, Ashley Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 08:31:01AM -0500, Ed Summers wrote:
>> As you already have found from your experiment, it's not currently
>> possible. Does anyone on the list know if the MARC standard indicates
> > how non integer tags sho
Not to worry this to death, but the SYS is an integer field with 9
digits using leading zeros. Instead of it being 36582, for example, the
SYS is stored as 36582. It is a serial assigned by the system and
is handled as an integer, not as an alpha-numeric. Wouldn't a "data
field" be gener
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 08:31:01AM -0500, Ed Summers wrote:
> As you already have found from your experiment, it's not currently
> possible. Does anyone on the list know if the MARC standard indicates
> how non integer tags should behave: as control fields (<010) or regular
> fields (>010)? Ashley
On Fri, Jul 30, 2004 at 08:56:06AM -0500, Eric Lease Morgan wrote:
> Alas, MARC::Field says I need to include a subfield in the SYS field,
> but that is not what I want. I want the SYS field to contain no
> indicators nor subfields. I want it to be just like normal MARC tags
> with values less t
