533 reproduction note

[CECSpecialistI]

https://github.com/uwlib-cams/MARC2RDA/blob/main/Working%20Documents/5XX.csv

[lake44me]

Here's a link to the 2014 PCC policy statement, describing the practice of "cloning" a record for the original, with specific changes to fixed fields and other areas but leaving most of the description for the original and using a 533 to describe the reproduction. This started out being for microforms, but is being used for electronic reproductions as well. It doesn't describe a "single record approach" for original and reproduction, but may be used with a single record approach for multiple electronic manifestations. https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.loc.gov%2Faba%2Fpcc%2Fdocuments%2F1-11-LC-PCC-PS.docx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK

Here's the MARC 533 field description:

Descriptive data for a reproduction of an original item when the main portion of the bibliographic record describes the original item and the data differ.

The original item is described in the main portion of the bibliographic record and data relevant to the reproduction are given as a note in field 533 when they differ from the information describing the original. It is used whenever an institution chooses to have the description reflect the original and the notes reflect information about the copy.

For mixed materials, this field contains information describing a copy of a record unit when the agency describing the materials possesses only a copy and, in accordance with conventions, the original is described in the main portion of the control record. This field is normally used in conjunction with field 535 (Location of Originals/Duplicates Note) which indicates the repository holding the original.

Other relevant documents:
PCC RDA Provider-Neutral Guidelines for Serials, Integrating Resources, and Monographs
OCLC Special Cataloging Guidelines section 3.1 and 3.2, Provider-Neutral cataloging for Electronic Resources and for Photocopy/POD (Print On Demand) reproductions.
DLF Registry of Digital Masters Record Creation Guidelines Version 2

[lake44me]

Challenge: 533 used for "single record" cataloging for photocopy / POD records following OCLC instruction would contain only 533 $a (type of reproduction). If a record follows the guidelines, a marker for when 533 is used in this context is 040 $e containing "pd" . This subfield $a may be mapped to the manifestation being described (as a category of manifestation?), but, should presence of such a field be used to modify the mapping for other fields in the record (to an IRI for the "original" manifestation) or should that be changed?. OCLC 3.2 specifies fields to describe the original; the key differing data here would be the place, producer, and date of production of the manifestation being described (e.g. POD reproduction) which is never specified (unless there is a local practice).
@CECSpecialistI

[lake44me]

Challenge: As far as I can tell, tag 533 doesn't provide data to distinguish reproductions which are published from those that are unpublished. RDA does not provide a "superelement" which could be used to map data when this is uncertain. There is Manifestation Production Statement for unpublished material and Manifestation Publication Statement for published material. There's a nonspecific Place of Manifestation, but when you get to the agent, you must choose Name of Producer for unpublished, or Name of publisher for published... there are separate properties for dates too. This question may have come up when mapping 260/264 as well - any advice @SitaKB ?
@CECSpecialistI

[lake44me]

@CECSpecialistI This is going to take more than a week to complete, but here's where I've gotten so far:

First pass / provisional mapping of 533 subfields EXCEPT for subfields $y (Data provenance) and $7 .

• I don't remember if we discussed $y but it appears we haven't made decision about it so it needs its own discussion. Appendix J: Data Provenance
• $7 needs more review/analysis relative to 008 mapping, It provides 008 values for the reproduction. I'll get to it before diving into the conditional mapping of other fields.

I have sketched out some of the fields that need conditional instructions for mapping, when a 533 is present:

008:
If 533 is present, mint a URI for an "original manifestation", manifesting the same expression of the same work as the reproduction represented by the MARC record. Follow the mapping instructions for 008 except:
(detail of which bytes should be mapped in relation to the original manifestation URI
(detail of which bytes should be mapped in relation to the current (reproduction) manifestation URI)
(detail of which bytes should be mapped in relation to both reproduction and original manifestation, if any)

245 if 533 is present, in addition to mapping contents of 245 subfields to mainfestation elements related to item cataloged (the reproduction), map to relation to a manifestation for the original (minted in 008 mapping).

260 and/or 264: if 533 is present, map manifestation properties in relation only to manifestation URI "for the original", as generated in the 008 mapping relation.

300: if 533 is present, map manifestation properties in relation only to manifestation URI "for the original", as generated in the 008 mapping relation

800, 810, 811, 830 if 533 is present, map manifestation properties only to manifestation URI "for the original" as generated in the 008 mapping relation.

I also need to figure out how to determine "digital masters" records that follow the DLF practice (how to determine if a record is for a digital master, and how mappings are affected) to see whether this presents a variant to what I'm proposing, and how this related to the location / 535 mapping.

[lake44me]

Challenge: 533 $m Dates and/or sequential designation of issues reproduced.

This implies relationship to an original that is an aggregating serial resource. The contents may indicate that all, or only a portion of that resource is reproduced in this manifestation, but which cannot be determined from the data.

The best I could come up with was Note on manifestation. If anyone involved with serials knows of any guidelines for describing reproductions that would give a more specific property/relation between the reproduction and the original, let me know!
Crystal, I don't know how to "@" everybody - can you see that these comments are shared to relevant people in the group?
@CECSpecialistI

[CECSpecialistI]

Thank you @lake44me ! I added a review of these comments to the agenda for tomorrow.

[CECSpecialistI]

From: Akerman, Laura <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 10:45 AM
To: Crystal Yragui <[email protected]>
Subject: 533 mapping

Hi Crystal,

For some weird reason I woke up at 2:30 this morning with energy and started working on the 533 mapping. I think I’ve covered every subfield but $7 . I’d appreciate it if you could review the fields I’ve mapped.

$7 is a selective “fixed field” corresponding to 008 general values for bytes 6-17 Date type, Date 1 and Date 2, and Country of publication, plus for continuing resources, byte 18 Frequency. I thought I could just borrow the mappings from the 008 field and plug them in here.

But… I need to be sure I understand the logic for at least the position 06 (Dtst) and 7-10 and 11-14 mappings, particularly for the notes that are getting generated and the transform notes. Would you be able to explain this to me? I think I wasn’t at those early 008 mapping parties… If I could possibly get a little of your time (say ½ an hour) for a Zoom call on this, next week or week after, or even early next year, that’d be great. Or suggest alternatives (should I talk to Sita?)

Later on, I would make a special version of 008 for records that contain a 533 tag, with instructions to mint an IRI for original manifestation and relate it to the expression and manifestation we are cataloging, and map designated position values to the description of that original manifestation based on the documentation we have about the previous PCC 533 practice. I’d ask Theo if he’d prefer getting this version with just the positions that describe the original (and put a condition /= 533 or something on those positions in the full 008 mapping), or duplicate the whole thing… Anyway, I need to understand the 008 mapping better than I thought I’d have to – or at least the dates part.

That may not be necessary for other tags – I could add conditional lines for what to do when 533 is present and make reference to the manifestation IRI for the original minted for 008 mapping. That’s the plan, anyway.

Laura

P.S. I see where we recorded a Decision in March to just map 533 as a Note on Manifestation, but from the discussion at the November 8 meeting, we are revisiting it, maybe we wait to change the Decision until after the mapping is done?

[CECSpecialistI]

@CECSpecialistI plans to work on this next week.

[CECSpecialistI]

For $7, look for some 539's in OCLC/some examples in Alma

[lake44me]

533 reproduction note examples

Use of $5

Millions like this in OCLC, and thousands in our Alma catalog (Hathi Trust):

oclc 615373298
533 Electronic reproduction. ‡b [Place of publication not identified] : ‡c HathiTrust Digital Library, ‡d 2010. ‡5 MiAaHDL

Use of $7

Probably hundreds of thousands like this, Eighteenth Century Collections Online eletronic set, contains $7

Emory Alma MMSID 990004332780302486
533 __ |a Electronic reproduction. |b Farmington Hills, Mich. : |c Thomson Gale, |d 2003. |n Available via the World Wide Web. |n Access limited by licensing agreements |7 s2003 miunns

Also in our Alma:
oclc 52967803
533 __ |a Electronic reproduction. |b Atlanta, Georgia : |c Pitts Theology Library, Emory University, |d 2003. |f (Thanksgiving Day Sermons, ATLA Cooperative Digital Resources Initiative, CDRI). |n Joint CDRI project by: Andover-Harvard Library (Harvard Divinity School), Pitts Theology Library (Emory University), and Princeton Theological Seminary Libraries. |7 s2003 gaun s

An example (of perhaps many) with 2 533 tags - Hathi Trust and Harvard Library identified in $5's

OCLC 674405981

506 __ |3 Use copy |f Restrictions unspecified |2 star |5 MiAaHDL
533 __ |a Electronic reproduction. |b [Place of publication not identified] : |c HathiTrust Digital Library, |d 2010. |5 MiAaHDL
538 __ |a Master and use copy. Digital master created according to Benchmark for Faithful Digital Reproductions of Monographs and Serials, Version 1. Digital Library Federation, December 2002. |u http://purl.oclc.org/DLF/benchrepro0212 |5 MiAaHDL
583 1_ |a digitized |c 2010 |h HathiTrust Digital Library |l committed to preserve |2 pda |5 MiAaHDL
588 0_ |a Print version record.
506 __ |a No restrictions on access copy. |5 MH
533 __ |a Electronic reproduction. |b Cambridge, Mass. : |c Harvard College Library Digital Imaging Group, |d 2008. |f (Harvard College Library preservation digitization program). |5 MH
538 __ |a Digital master created according to Benchmark for Faithful Digital Reproductions of Monographs and Serials, Version 1. Digital Library Federation, December 2002. |u http://purl.oclc.org/DLF/benchrepro0212 |5 MH
583 1_ |j Harvard University Library |l committed to preserve |5 MH

I can look for more, but I think from what I've seen so far, the use of $5 indicates the institution that created the reproduction, not necessarily the one that owns a copy that was reproduced. That's at least the case for the Hathi Trust 533's.

Do we need to see more $7's? Or should we just attempt to map them based on the 008 bytes they represent?

[lake44me]

for $5, would this do?

Creator corporate body of manifestation http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/m/P30421

either Identifier (the symbol),
or a nomen that has nomen string of the symbol along with scheme of nomen https://www.loc.gov/marc/organizations/orgshome.html

or IRI (the id.loc.gov Cultural Heritage Institutions IRI corresponding to the symbol, if we take this to be a "real world object" IRI, but note some symbols aren't represented in this list, e.g. MiAaHDL for Hathi Trust Digital Library)

[lake44me]

Thanks @cspayne! That answers my big question (#1) and lets me know #3 (provider neutral) is not a holdup.

[CECSpecialistI]

Hi @lake44me

I am not clear on the 533/008 issues either, and would appreciate an opportunity to be caught up. Do you think it would make sense for us to meet and talk about this before you go full steam ahead and invest more time in it, as you say? There are many comments spanning a good amount of time, and I'm not sure which ones still apply and which ones have been moved on from. Are you able to put together a succinct summary of what the issues are and what you're planning to do with the 008 and 533? Or, would you like me to try and put something on the calendar for you, me, and @cspayne in the next couple of weeks?

[lake44me]

Proposal for mapping 533 $7 (fixed field information for the reproduction) - with wrinkles:

Tag 533 $7. $7 is a "mini-fixed-field" for the reproduction manifestation being described by the MARC record. My approach is to identify 008 mappings to apply to the positions in $7 and just say something like:

Mapping to Reproduction manifestation:

For byte 0, apply 008 mappings for byte 6 (Type of date/Publication status)
For bye 1-4, apply 008 mappings for bytes 7-10 (Date1)
For bytes 4-8, apply 008 mappings for butes 11-14 (Date2)"
For bytes 9-12, apply 008 mappings for bytes 15-17 (Place of Publication, Production or Execution)
For byte 13, for Continuing Resources format only*, apply 008 mapping for byte 18 (Frequency)
For byte 14, for Continuing Resources format only*, apply 008 mapping for byte 19 (Regularity)
For byte 15, if format is Maps or Visual Materials*, apply 008 mapping for byte 29 (Form of Item). For all other formats*, apply 008 mapping for byte 23 (Form of item)

*conditions for determining format found elsewhere...?

Wrinkle:
Looking at the definitions in https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd533.html, we may need to break out the Date1 and Date2 mappings for Continuing Resources since the meaning is different. For "non-serials" the meaning seems straightforward and applying the 008 mappings relatively uncomplicated - the dates are of publication, etc. of the reproduction.

For serially-issued items, 1-4 contains the original beginning date of publication of the issues that have been reproduced, as indicated in subfield $m of field 533.
For serially-issued items, 5-8 contains the original ending date of publication of the issues that have been reproduced, as indicated in subfield $m of field 533.

This reproduction-specific information probably will probably need to be a note field - or, if there are dates in subfield $m of the 533, just ignore these bytes. The reproduction manifestation may or may not be a continuing resource... ?

@SitaKB @CECSpecialistI @AdamSchiff @cspayne @GordonDunsire @JianPLee

[lake44me]

Wrinkle #2 - Form of item (byte 15)

LC-PCC PS for 1.11 RDA (Original RDA toolkit)
Microform reproduction of print resources

	008/23: Record the value associated with the microform being cataloged (a, b, or c). 
	This in contrast to other enumerated 008 fields which should be coded for the original (print resource)

Print on Demand (POD) Reproductions and Photocopies
	008/23 (Form of item) or 008/29 (Form of item): Record the value "r" indicating the form of item is a print reproduction.
	Again, the value in the 008 pertains to the reproduction, not the original

PCC Provider-Neutral E-resources

008 23 / 29 Form of item - says "use code 'o' ; all other bytes of the 008 should reflect the original manifestation.  (o = online)

If the form of item in the 008 pertains to the reproduction, how and why could the byte 15 value in 533 $7 be different?

[lake44me]

@CECSpecialistI @AdamSchiff

Added this note to the mapping for 533:

Problem to be addressed when we tackle serial conversion (Phase 2)?
Definition for Date1 and Date2 in subfield 7 (fixed field information for the reproduction) for continuing resources are defined as original beginning and ending dates of issue for the reproduced serial volume, not date(s) of issue for the reproduction.

I need to understand more about how this fits in with the cataloging of reproductions of serials/CRs.

Do the reproductions get the same record format (Continuing Resources) as the original?

Other than this question, I wrote out the $7 mapping and think I am done with the 533 mapping, but we can wait on approving it until the other fields mappings are done.

[lake44me]

@CECSpecialistI @cspayne @dchen077 Crystal, can you review the 533 $7 mapping (the fixed field coding for the reproduction) - otherwise 533 is ready for code. Does it need to wait until the 008 coding is stabilized?

All the logic in that field is in the transformation notes:

"/0 - Type of date/Publication status
Use 008 06 mappings
Note: code r (original and reproduction dates) should not be used here!

/1-4 - Date 1
Use 008 07-10 mappings

/5-8 - Date 2
Use 008 11-14 mappings

/9-11 - Place of publication, production, or execution
Use 008 15-17 mappings

/12 - Frequency
Format must be CONTINUING RESOURCES.
Use 008 18 mappings

/13 - Regularity
Format must be CONTINUING RESOURCES
Use 008 19 mapping

/14 - Form of item
If Format is BOOKS, COMPUTER FILES, MUSIC, CONTINUING RESOURCES, or MIXED MATERIALS
Use 008 23 mapping for the respective format

If Format is MAPS or VISUAL MATERIALS
Use 008 29 mapping"

[CECSpecialistI]

I don't have the capacity to be the reviewer on this in the next couple of weeks. If someone else can pick up the mapping review, I would be grateful. Since it relies on 008 values it might make sense to hold off on coding until the 008 mapping is finished?

[cspayne]

@lake44me
I just marked $7 as reviewed, everything looks good to me. I added the link you provided me in a previous email to OCLC (https://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/fixedfield/type.html) to help determine the format, which will be necessary for the transform.

[lake44me]

Thanks @cspayne ! I moved 533 to Ready for Transform

[cspayne]

code on hold for $7/01-04 and $7/05-08 until 008 - #50 is updated

[cspayne]

Hi @lake44me, I just updated 245 based on reproduction conditions and ran 5 records with 533 or 588 reproduction conditions through the transform to show what the output currently looks like. Not all fields that have reproduction conditions have been mapped at this point, but 006, 008, 533, and 264 should be set.
The 5 records are here, and output is in this folder if you would like to take a look!