Add Structured Ownership and Custodial History (MARC 361)

[TobiasNx]

See #2198 by @blackwinter

Initial groundwork for implementing the new MARC field 361 (Structured Ownership and Custodial History) which is required for the union catalogue (DigiBib; cf. Jira ticket).

Tentatively modeled after the MARC format specification (see also Service Wiki: Format); handing off to @acka47 / @TobiasNx for proper modeling in accordance with Lobid requirements.

The search fields are still being discussed (see Service Wiki: Survey) and might have to be changed once the survey has concluded.

Examples:

HT005003652 (990081807500206441 - https://lobid.org/resources/990081807500206441)

<datafield tag="361" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
  <subfield code="5">DE-51</subfield>
  <subfield code="s">G 1506a-2</subfield>
  <subfield code="o">Vorbesitz</subfield>
  <subfield code="a">Weichert, August</subfield>
  <subfield code="f">Exlibris</subfield>
  <subfield code="z">Angabe auf dem Exlibris-Etikett: Ex Bibliotheca Augusti Weichert</subfield>
</datafield>

HT005003646 (990081807490206441 - https://lobid.org/resources/990081807490206441)

<datafield tag="361" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
  <subfield code="5">DE-51</subfield>
  <subfield code="s">G 1506a-1</subfield>
  <subfield code="o">Vorbesitz</subfield>
  <subfield code="a">Weichert, August</subfield>
  <subfield code="f">Exlibris</subfield>
  <subfield code="z">Angabe auf dem Exlibris-Etikett: Ex Bibliotheca Augusti Weichert</subfield>
</datafield>

HT000582849 (990005108810206441 - https://lobid.org/resources/990005108810206441)

<datafield tag="361" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
  <subfield code="5">DE-51</subfield>
  <subfield code="s">G1505h</subfield>
  <subfield code="o">Vorbesitz</subfield>
  <subfield code="a">Bezirk Minden Westfalen Regierung</subfield>
  <subfield code="0">(DE-588)4420585-5</subfield>
  <subfield code="f">Stempel</subfield>
  <subfield code="z">Angabe Stempel: Bibliothek der Regierung zu Minden</subfield>
</datafield>

[TobiasNx]

MARC format specification (see also Service Wiki: Format)

361 - Structured Ownership and Custodial History (R)

The field contains copy-specific information in structured form, concerning the ownership and custodial history of the described materials from the time of their creation to the time of their accessioning. Textual information about each step in the biography of the copy can be added.

For comprehensive textual information about ownership and custodial history, field 561 (Ownership and Custodial History) is used. The immediate source of acquisition is recorded in field 541 (Immediate Source of Acquisition Note).

I am somewhat confused.

This info seems to be about the items since it refers to copy-specific information right?
If so I am not sure if the info should not be placed at the top level, but within the hasItem[] property of the current holding.

At the same time these seem to be no archival resources with single items and a single holding library but all of the examples given by @blackwinter have multiple items with holdings by multiple libraries.

We should clarify: How is the provenance info related to the resource before we advance.

[blackwinter]

Maybe you want to add your questions to the survey?

[TobiasNx]

I think I found the relation:

The callNumber in $$s as well as the ISIL in $$5 are refering to an item.

HT005003652 (990081807500206441 - https://lobid.org/resources/990081807500206441)

<datafield tag="361" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
  <subfield code="5">DE-51</subfield>
  <subfield code="s">G 1506a-2</subfield>
  <subfield code="o">Vorbesitz</subfield>
  <subfield code="a">Weichert, August</subfield>
  <subfield code="f">Exlibris</subfield>
  <subfield code="z">Angabe auf dem Exlibris-Etikett: Ex Bibliotheca Augusti Weichert</subfield>
</datafield>

=> https://lobid.org/marcxml/990081807500206441
It refers to the item/local holding with the almaMmsId: 22113166670006480

<datafield tag="H52" ind1="8" ind2=" ">
<subfield code="b">LLB</subfield>
<subfield code="c">LLB_MagLes</subfield>
<subfield code="h">02-G 1506a-2</subfield>
<subfield code="8">22113166670006480</subfield>
</datafield>
...
<datafield tag="ITM" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="H">22113166670006480</subfield>
<subfield code="x">LLB_MagLes</subfield>
<subfield code="f">BOOK</subfield>
<subfield code="v">LLB_MagLes</subfield>
<subfield code="p">lesesaal</subfield>
<subfield code="X">l9s-3d7</subfield>
<subfield code="Y">2025-07-10 09:16:21 Europe/Berlin</subfield>
<subfield code="h">false</subfield>
<subfield code="n">02-G 1506a-2</subfield>
<subfield code="G">1</subfield>
<subfield code="M">49HBZ_DET</subfield>
<subfield code="s">1</subfield>
<subfield code="d">8</subfield>
<subfield code="V">l9s-3d7</subfield>
<subfield code="b">06234091</subfield>
<subfield code="a">23113166650006480</subfield>
<subfield code="c">02-G 1506a-2</subfield>
<subfield code="W">2025-07-10 09:16:21 Europe/Berlin</subfield>
<subfield code="u">LLB</subfield>
<subfield code="w">LLB</subfield>
</datafield>

[TobiasNx]

Instructive article: https://zs.thulb.uni-jena.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/jportal_derivate_00347323/j24-h1-ber-1.pdf

[TobiasNx]

With regard to our model I would suggest that we build this around the items, but to be honest I am not sure currently how to do it without unambiguous link between holding item and 361, maybe we use the link of callNumber and ISIL to ITM. On the other hand it seems that the cataloguing of 361 in the Verbundkatalog-NZ is no yet fully out of the test phase. Maybe we wait until then with the implementation.

[acka47]

This reminds me of a ten-year-old issue we have never implemented: lobid/lodmill#725

[TobiasNx]

Unfortunately $y is not sufficiently used in context of hbz this would allow to reference the holding record/almaMmsId of the item that the custodial information is about.

https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd361.html