[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Photo MARC cataloging question (sizes in 300 field)



Lynn, reviewing the MARC pages at
<http://lcweb.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/ecbdphys.html#mrcb300> I find no
indication that measurements must be given in a certain standard--whether
Brit. or Am.  although the examples appear to favor the metric.  but not
necessarily cm over mm or vice versa.  But like you I find inconsistency
very distracting.  I'd be interested to hear from those who've done a fair
amount of photographic material cataloguing and esp to hear what the
"preferred" form for conveying size is.  Another thing that crossed my mind
while looking for the page was the distinction between 300 and 340.  At
least when doing photos.  Again, 340 seems to allow for more precision in
description and there looks to be some leeway/flexibility with respect to
using either for photographic stuff, but it would appear that there's some
"preferred" form and "best practices" philosophies evolving out there and
I'm curious about those.  So I hope responses will go to the list.


Holly Hodges

A posting from the Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List!

To subscribe or unsubscribe, send e-mail to listserv@listserv.muohio.edu
      In body of message:  SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname
                    *or*:  UNSUB ARCHIVES
To post a message, send e-mail to archives@listserv.muohio.edu

Or to do *anything* (and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html

Problems?  Send e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <rschmidt@lib.muohio.edu>