Search results

This article has been withdrawn as it was published elsewhere and accidentally duplicated. The original article can be seen here: 10.1108/00242539610107604. When citing the article, please cite: Mortaza Kokabi, (1996), “Is the future of MARC assured?”, Library Review, Vol. 45 Iss: 2, pp. 68 - 72.

Surveys the development of various MARC formats out of USMARC. Considers the formats for Canada, France, Spain and Indonesia. Indicates their main points of difference and local requirements.

Discusses some of the problems associated with the requirements and the prospects for international standards for the exchange of bibliographic records in machine‐readable form: the various roles of national bibliographies and national libraries; a lack of international cataloging standards; a lack of an international subject control system; language difficulties; character sets and codes; and nonroman alphabets. Explains that these problems lie behind the development of various MARC formats out of UNIMARC. In this final part of a four‐part article, describes the formats for South Africa, Taiwan, Japan, Croatia and Germany and indicates the points of difference and local requirements.

Among the problems associated with the requirements and the prospects for international standards for the exchange of bibliographic records in machine‐readable form are the various roles of national bibliographies and national libraries; a lack of international cataloguing standards; a lack of an international subject control system; language difficulties; character sets and codes; and non‐roman alphabets. These problems lie behind the development of various MARC formats out of UNIMARC. In this final part of a four‐part article describes the formats for South Africa, Taiwan, Japan, Croatia and Germany and indicates the points of difference and local requirements.

Surveys the development of various MARC formats out of UKMARC. Describes the formats for Australia, Thailand, Italy and Singapore and indicates their main points of difference and local requirements.

Surveys the evolution and development of various MARC formats out of UKMARC. Describes the formats for Australia, Thailand, Italy and Singapore and indicates their main points of difference and local requirements.

Surveys the development of various MARC formats out of USMARC. Considers the formats for Canada, France, Spain and Indonesia. Indicates their main points of difference and local requirements.

The machine‐readable catalogue (MARC) is now more than 20 years old. It has been, and still is, criticized from different points of view. Reviews some of the positive and negative opinions on MARC, as expressed by different sectors of the profession, and studies the future of MARC in relation to technological innovations. Concludes that MARC remains a valuable means of communicating bibliographical information.

Surveys the evolution and development of MARC formats for the digital encoding of bibliographic data from their beginnings in 1968 at the Library of Congress to the present time, with particular emphasis on the development of 17 national formats. Examines the reasons for the divergence of MARC formats from each other as well as the early and recent trends in the development of national MARC formats.

Surveys the evolution and development of MARC formats for the digital encoding of bibliographic data from their beginnings in 1968 at the Library of Congress to the present time, with particular emphasis on the development of 17 national formats. Examines the reasons for the divergence of MARC formats from each other as well as the early and recent trends in the development of national MARC formats.