All fields are repeatable unless otherwise specified.
A text string.
Attribution (not repeatable)
A single text string, think of MARC’s 245$c statement of responsibility
Subfields: Name, Role
Subfields: seven discrete textual terms/phrases, each with an associated type
A numerical date or date range
A geographical point or area
Subfields: type, number, location
Subfields: Type, Language, Content, Notes
Pre-defined types include: description, transcription, translation, contents, review, notes, first words, last words, dedication, notable quotations, sample
Subfields: publisher, edition, language, date (and date certainty), copyright status, copyright note
Subfields: width, height, depth (and unites of measure), weight (and unit), duration (minutes or pages), cost (and currency)
This is the equivalent of MARC’s 856 field (and thus nearly useless). My intention is to accept URLs in any field and properly link the data from there.
Information about the format of the object identified by the record.
Where you’d input ISBN, ISSN, and other standard numbers
Archival Source Details
Information about the provenance of the object.
Related Record Links
Predefined relationships include: parent, child, next in series/page, previous, and reverse side. This field could also easily store FRBR relationships. The expected input is a URL to a local or remote record
Of the above fields, these are indexed:
- year of creation
- month of creation
- subject year
- subject month
- subject day