Fields 090 and 092 are very often used by institution to store their locally created LC class number and Dewey class number. It is very common to see that information there. It was not a safe field. Picking those fields to store other information was not the best choice. Something in the 9XX would have been better. However, if someone has info in 090, they could move it to 050, with a second indicator of 4. 050 can repeat, so the record could have an 050 with a second indicator of 0 for LC and another with a second indicator of 4 for the locally created number. MarcEdit or MARC::pm may be able to make the change. Field 001 is used for the bibliographic record number. It can be different for each institution. An institution receiving a record from OCLC, for example, will move the current record number to 035 and then place their number in 001 and their institutional code in 003. Each bibliographic record can have several items attached to that one record. For instance, an encyclopedia will only have the one record for the work but each volume must have their individual barcodes, and other copy information recorded. The copy and work information should be kept separate and not confused. Sincerely, David Bigwood bigwood@lpi.usra.edu Lunar & Planetary Institute Cataloging news: http://www.catalogablog.blogspot.com -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Hedges [mailto:shedges@skemotah.com] Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 7:23 PM To: Greg Lambert/Amigos Cc: koha@lists.katipo.co.nz Subject: Re: [Koha] 090 Fields Greg Lambert/Amigos said:

As I was reviewing the bulkmarcimport I noticed that the 090 MARC field is used by Koha as the ITEMTYPE fields.

In the MARC data I am importing, the 090 "a" and "b" subfields are assigned local LC call numbers.

Since Koha assigns "a" as Koha Itemtype (NR) "b" as Koha Dewey Subclass (NR) "c" as Koha biblionumber (NR) "d" as Koha biblioitemnumber (NR)

What will happen to my original 090a and 090b fields? Will they still be in the database? If so, will this cause item "issues"?

My limited cataloging knowledge tells me that the 001 field is used for the item number information (at least in the colleges I've worked). Is that not the case with MARC21?

Thanks! -Greg

Hmmm. Do you mean your existing MARC records use an 090 field? Koha has to store some important non-MARC information, primarily the biblionumber, biblioitemnumber and the itemtype, in the MARC record in order to interface with the "old" Koha databases. The 090 tag was chosen because neither MARC21 nor Unimarc define any use for this tag, so it was considered to be "safe." If you have existing MARC records that have data in an 090 tag, then you have a problem. You could move the data to a new tag using MARC::Record. -- Stephen Hedges Skemotah Solutions, USA www.skemotah.com -- shedges@skemotah.com _______________________________________________ Koha mailing list Koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha