Stephens, Owen wrote: >> I was thinking CONSER might have the equivalent. At least, MARC >> holdings >> format does make provisions for that. >> > Does it? I've never seen MARC summary holdings recorded in a way that is easily machine parsable > That may be, but at least the specs *are* all there: http://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/ and more particularly in http://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/hd863865.html What we have looks somewhat simpler. B.EversbergReceived on Thu Mar 19 2009 - 10:38:05 EDT