Hello,

there has been a discussion on Discuss, here: https://discuss.folio.org/t/listing-marc-fields-for-reporting/1335
I think we should reach consens within the SIG whether we need all MARC fields (bibliographic & holdings) for the reporting database or not.

The discussion in my local group (hbz) revealed that not all fields are needed - for example "subtitle". But this may be right only for DBS and only at present.

If we need all MARC fields we won't need a working group. What would it do ? It could put together a list of MARC fields (maybe only the most important ones) and their meaning - put this would only copy the definitions on https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/ and https://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/ .

Concerning regional standards (e.g. with cataloging holdings) I neither see a need to document this then, because before reporting the data there will be an import into FOLIO and we don't know yet what the data will look like after that import. The import scripts should try to eliminate regional differences in the use of MARC fields (as much as possible) and set up some kind of FOLIO standard.

Also, if we select on MARC fields, we will also have to make a selection on DC (and other) fields.

I will be in the meeting at 9 am EST today.
Here is the link in case anybody else from the SIG wants to join : https://zoom.us/331231653

Best,
Ingolf

------------------------------------------------------
You received this message because you are subscribed to OLE Mailing List "reporting-sig".
To unsubscribe from this list and stop receiving emails from it, follow this link: http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=tOR7dt1EJ9LG0Mt9rQZRAMV5S51fjDeM.
To post to this group, send email to reporting-sig@ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org <mailto:reporting-sig@ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org>.
Visit this group at https://ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org<https://ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org> .