On Fri, July 14, 2006 2:17 pm, Edward Summers wrote: > This is all fine, but lets talk in unit tests for MARC::Record if we > can. They will make plain what the actual behavior is ...
I was commenting here about my concern raised by the findings of Paul Poulain. I had no test of my own showing any problem. Paul may not have a formal test himself. In due course, I will report my own very different field ordering problems with tests which may have some relation to anomalies relating to the use of letters as part of field codes. "There is only so much time in the day", and I want to think carefully about the exact behaviour or function that I would prefer to my present workarounds before posting. I also want to experiment with new functionality for accessing subfields first. In the original form I had seen Paul report a problem, the problem had seemed to be from the use of punctuation symbols for subfield codes. He described the issue as one of invalid subfield codes in his post on the perl4lib list. They may well have been invalid codes in his case for the records that he had. I wanted to be certain that it was understood that the use of characters outside the character range specified in a standards document is not necessarily an invalid use. The standards simply do not specify all that systems use and find necessary. I had no report or tests to offer for this particular problem myself. I hoped a hoped to caution against designing a presumption that some characters were invalid if Paul had correctly identified such a problem. I have no problem to report about this issue but I will report about the problem which I do have and I may find a relation for the ordering of codes. Thomas Dukleth Agogme 109 E 9th Street, 3D New York, NY 10003 USA http://www.agogme.com 212-674-3783
