"That said, we could make the parenthetical check more robust, and
require the value in the record to match the configured value for the
Evergreen instance.*"*

This is the issue I think is the more significant issue.  I've had to help
libraries who copy cataloged from other Evergreen installations and had
issues with the imported authority links.  In a perfect world an option to
strip them out of marc import would be nice too.

On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Mike Rylander <email address hidden> wrote:

> I would argue that we are following the standard.  The format of our $0
> is:
>
> $0(FOO) 123456
>
> where "FOO" is configurable to be a proper MARC Organization code, and
> "123456" is our system control number for the relevant authority record.
> Since we specifically check for a preceding parenthetical when
> inspecting the $0, staff (or outside record sources) can safely use
> URIs, which don't have the preceding parenthetical.
>
> That said, we could make the parenthetical check more robust, and
> require the value in the record to match the configured value for the
> Evergreen instance.
>
> I also don't think it's a /bad/ thing to be able to strip $0s, but I
> imagine it might be good to consider this in a larger context of single
> "strip what I ask you to strip" feature rather than adding a new option
> for each field we may strip at some point.  Located URI data comes to
> mind here...
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to
> Evergreen.
> Matching subscriptions: evergreenbugs
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1754455
>
> Title:
>   marc_export should (optionally) remove 0 subfields
>
> Status in Evergreen:
>   New
>
> Bug description:
>   Wishlist
>
>   LOC MARC specification for Bibliographic Records describes subcode 0
>   thusly:
>
>   "Subfield $0 contains the system control number of the related
>   authority or classification record, or a standard identifier such as
>   an International Standard Name Identifier (ISNI). These identifiers
>   may be in the form of text or a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI). If
>   the identifier is text, the control number or identifier is preceded
>   by the appropriate MARC Organization code (for a related authority
>   record) or the Standard Identifier source code (for a standard
>   identifier scheme), enclosed in parentheses. When the identifier is
>   given in the form of a Web retrieval protocol, e.g., HTTP URI, no
>   preceding parenthetical is used.
>
>   Subfield $0 may contain a URI that identifies a name or label for an
>   entity. When dereferenced, the URI points to information describing
>   that name. A URI that directly identifies the entity itself is
>   contained in subfield $1.
>
>   See MARC Code List for Organizations for a listing of organization
>   codes and Standard Identifier Source Codes for code systems for
>   standard identifiers. Subfield $0 is repeatable for different control
>   numbers or identifiers."
>
>   CWMARS -- and presumably other Evergreen users -- use subfield 0 in
>   ways that (I presume) may impair data interchange. It would be useful
>   if marc_export could optionally suppress the output of these
>   subfields.
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/1754455/+subscriptions
>