Numeric Character References: Best Practices

 

 

Document status

APPROVED;REVIEWED  Jul 3, 2019 

Area covered

Cataloging

Prepared by

Cataloging Task Force

Adapted from

Orbis Cascade Alliance Collaborative Technical Services Team

 

Background

Best practices for dealing with numeric character references in records using non-Latin scripts. To be used in conjunction with the policy “Numeric Character References.”

Best practice recommendations

Non-MARC-8 scripts exported in MARC-8 data format are saved in Numeric Character Reference (NCR) format (see Numeric Character Reference on Wikipedia for more information). However, all settings for Alma should be UTF-8 Unicode.

NOTE: NCRs should NOT be used to create non-Latin scripts for scripts not supported by OCLC. Examples include Georgian, Khmer, and anything else not listed above. Non-Latin fields using NCRs to render non-supported scripts should be deleted from OCLC master records when cataloging and should not be added Alma.

However, some previously unsupported scripts/characters are now supported by OCLC, so non-Latin fields using NCRs in those cases will need to be upgraded.

Old record using NCRs should be upgraded when used for cataloging (Mongolian example):

Upgraded record using newly supported characters (Kazakh example):

 

Connexion Client Help advises that unsupported non-Latin characters can be entered and exported to a local system using Unicode, but then deleted from the OCLC master record (NOTE: This violates CSU policy, don’t do it!); or you can enter the name of the character within square brackets using the Unicode standard name (for example, enter [schwa]), or for CJK characters, enter the reading of the character (for example, enter [yin]). NOTE: Client Help does not advise using NCRs. But OCLC noted: “However, for the stray unsupported character that appears in a supported script, then the NCR is appropriate. If the script is not supported, it should not be represented in the database, but rather be transliterated.”

Action log

 

Section

Point Person

Expected Completion Date

Last action taken

Next action required

Section

Point Person

Expected Completion Date

Last action taken

Next action required

Separated out best practices from policy

@Cataloging Task Force

Feb 6, 2017