The MARC standard and encoded archival description
| Date | 01 March 2004 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/07378830410524468 |
| Published date | 01 March 2004 |
| Pages | 18-27 |
| Author | Peter Carini,Kelcy Shepherd |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Library & information science |
The MARC standard and
encoded archival
description
Peter Carini and
Kelcy Shepherd
The machine-readable cataloging (MARC)
format should have a price on its head,
according to Tennant (2002). In his article
``MARC must die'', Tennant (2002) decries
MARC as being antiquated and claims that it
has outlived its usefulness ± and, while he is
perhaps a little premature in his call, he is very
likely correct. Archivists have had mixed
feelings about MARC since the development of
the Archives and Manuscripts Control
(MARC-AMC) format in 1983, in part due to
its origin as a fundamentally bibliographic
standard. Ironically, it is the adoption of the
MARC-AMC format, and resulting
standardization of descriptive information, that
may make it possible for some small archives to
move into the new age of Extensible Markup
Language (XML) fairly painlessly.
This case study will discuss the MARC
standard in the context of archival description,
and follow the evolution of descriptive practices
and use of standards at the Mount Holyoke
College Archives and Special Collections. This
evolution includes the automation of collection
description using a database compliant with
MARC-AMC, export of finding aids from the
database into HyperText Markup Language
(HTML), and procedures currently in use to
convert records in the database from MARC
binary files into Encoded Archival Description
(EAD). In detailing these experiences, the study
will demonstrate how greater standardization of
archival information facilitates the ability to
adopt new standards and technologies.
Archival description and the MARC
standard
Archival description is a term used by archivists
to denote the process of capturing, exchanging,
and providing access to information about sets
of historical records (Miller, 1990). MARC
cataloging is just one aspect of this process. The
primary descriptive tool used by archivists for
decades has been a register or inventory now
ubiquitously, and somewhat erroneously,
lumped under the very broad term ``finding
aid''. A finding aid is, in fact, any tool that
The authors
Peter Carini is Director of Archives and Special Collections,
Mount Holyoke College, South Hadley, Massachusetts, USA,
and a Part-time Lecturer in Archival Studies for the Simmons
College Graduate School of Library and Information Science,
Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Kelcy Shepherd is the Project Director, Five College Finding
Aids Access Project, University of Massachusetts, Amherst,
Massachusetts, USA.
Keywords
Archives, Descriptive cataloguing, Standards,
Administrative data processing
Abstract
This case study details the evolution of descriptive practices
and standards used in the Mount Holyoke College Archives
and the Five College Finding Aids Access Project, discusses the
relationship of Encoded Archival Description (EAD) and the
MARC standard in reference to archival description, and
addresses the challenges and opportunities of transferring
data from one metadata standard to another. The study
demonstrates that greater standardization in archival
description allows archivists to respond more effectively to
technological change.
Electronic access
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is
available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0737-8831.htm
Received 2 September 2003
Revised 24 September 2003
Accepted 7 November 2003
18
Library Hi Tech
Volume 22 .Number 1 .2004 .pp. 18-27
#Emerald Group Publishing Limited .ISSN 0737-8831
DOI 10.1108/07378830410524468
To continue reading
Request your trial