In terms of whether or not it gets used, one can only hope. I can see this data being used by holdings update vendors to provide better coverage data for OpenURL resolvers as well as publishers pushing ONIX data to us for a variety of products for which normalized coverage dates are needed or preferred. Since the move to the CONSER standard record with 362's being entered as textual information without regard to normalized entry, this could potentially alleviate some of the concerns that libraries had with that change. While publication patterns certainly go a long way towards showing the very detailed nature of numbering "irregularities", they don't seem to be used as much by libraries for the purpose they were intended. It will be interesting to see what direction this and other innovations take as we move data out of the 008 into normalized, and potentially interoperable, tagged fields.

-----Original Message-----
From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum [mailto:SERIALST@list.uvm.edu] On Behalf Of Corrice, Julia A.
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 9:38 AM
To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: [SERIALST] 363 field: Normalized Date and Sequential Designation

In the latest update we received for MARC Format for Bibliographic Data,
a new field (363) for the normalized date in the 362 was added. Is
anyone going to be using this field? I'm wonding what potential
usefulness it might have.

http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd363.html

Julia Corrice

Serials
Rakow Library
Corning Museum of Glass
5 Museum Way
Corning, NY 14830
(607) 974-8406
(607)974-8677 fax
www.cmog.org