MARC21 bibliographic fields 006 007 and 008 have multple definitions depending in publication type.
By now there are multiple methods to encode these fields:
As part of the field identifier (used by marc-schema in 007 and 008):
{
"fields": {
"008a": ...,
"008b": ...,
Special key types (used by QA Catalogue):
{
"006": {
"tag": "006",
"label": "Additional Material Characteristics",
"types": {
"All Materials": {
"positions": ...
Additional level at the positions element (used by marc-schema in 006)
{
"fields": {
"006": {
"tag": "006",
"label": "Fixed-Length Data Elements-Additional Material Characteristics",
"positions": {
"008b": [ ... ],
"008c": [ ... ],
....
There should be only one way to encode these fields/positions/types. I favour the method use by QA-Catalogue but maybe in a slightly different way (see dini-ag-kim/avram#51).
MARC21 bibliographic fields 006 007 and 008 have multple definitions depending in publication type.
By now there are multiple methods to encode these fields:
As part of the field identifier (used by marc-schema in
007and008):{ "fields": { "008a": ..., "008b": ...,Special key
types(used by QA Catalogue):{ "006": { "tag": "006", "label": "Additional Material Characteristics", "types": { "All Materials": { "positions": ...Additional level at the
positionselement (used by marc-schema in006){ "fields": { "006": { "tag": "006", "label": "Fixed-Length Data Elements-Additional Material Characteristics", "positions": { "008b": [ ... ], "008c": [ ... ], ....There should be only one way to encode these fields/positions/types. I favour the method use by QA-Catalogue but maybe in a slightly different way (see dini-ag-kim/avram#51).