MARC Proposal No. 2014-04: Adding Miscellaneous Information in Topical Term and Geographic Name Fields of the MARC 21 Bibliographic and Authority Formats. This proposal from the German National Library follows up on a discussion paper at Midwinter and proposes the use of subfield $g (Miscellaneous information) in subject fields X50 and X51 to contain various types of qualifying terms. Library of Congress has not used separate subfielding for its qualifying terms in subject headings, but the German National Library has found them useful for coding distinguishing terms as it combined four authority files into the Gemeinsame Normdatei. Prior to the conference Adam Schiff suggested adding X55 genre/form fields to the proposal, since they too can have qualifiers, and Pat Riva on behalf of the Canadian Committee on MARC supported adding X55s and questioned whether “Miscellaneous information” is the best name for the subfield.
MARC Proposal No. 2014-05: Designating Relationships between Subject Headings from Different Thesauri in the MARC 21 Authority Format.This proposal, also following from a German National Library discussion paper presented at Midwinter, explores the addition of subfield $i (Relationship information) and $4 (Relationship code) to the MARC21 Authority Format’s 7XX fields (Heading Linking Entries). The goal is to be able to express a variety of mapping relationships—Equivalence (EQ, =EQ, ~EQ, simple, exact, and inexact equivalence respectively]), Broader mapping (BM), Narrower mapping (NM), Related mapping (RM)—between terms in different subject thesauri. The codes derive from ISO 25964 “Information and documentation—Thesauri and interoperability with other vocabularies,” part 2 “Interoperability with other vocabularies” (ISO 25964-2). Without some change, the Authority 7XX fields can only express equivalence. The proposal chooses not to address the “1-to-2” cases noted in the discussion paper where a single heading in one system equates to two headings used together in another system, given that there is no clear way to do reciprocal coding of the relationship in the system with two terms.
MARC Proposal No. 2014-06:Defining New Field 388 for Time Period of Creation Terms in the MARC 21 Authority and Bibliographic Formats. This proposal from SAC’s Genre/Form Implementation Subcommittee with assistance from the Library of Congress proposes defining field 388 in the authority and bibliographic formats for expressing the time period of creation or origin for works and expressions. This is needed to preserve and continue the practice of assigning works and expressions to named cultural periods, as has been the case in LC subject headings, e.g., “Christian literature, Early” or “German poetry—Early modern, 1500-1700.” Such cultural period names would be omitted from an LCGFT term. The proposal originated as a discussion paper at ALA Annual 2013.
Follow up from MAC at Midwinter, 2014 MARC Proposal No. 2014-02 : Making Subfield $c (Location of meeting) repeatable. The proposal was approved by MAC and the MARC Steering Committee.
Discussion Paper No. 2014-DP03: "Miscellaneous information" in Topical Term and Geographic Name Fields. This discussion paper has returned as Proposal No. 2014-04, discussed above.
Discussion Paper No. 2014-DP02: Relationships between Subject Headings from Different Thesauri. This discussion paper has returned as Proposal No. 2014-05, discussed above.