Hello Tibor,
 
> On Mon, 08 Feb 2010, Ferran Jorba wrote:
>> I disagree here.  I think that the same records that are in the demo
>> site are good enough *if* the indicators follow the standard rules.
>
> It would not be good to alter existing demo markup en bloc.  We have
> to make sure that things still work properly for the traditional
> indicator-free demo markup, since it may have been used by many
> installations relying on the demo defaults.  Hence the idea was to
> have just a few indicator-full demo records living besides the
> traditional indicator-free demo records, so that we are sure we can
> handle both situations equally well.

*Except* that what I'm proposing is that it is closer to the standard
Marc21 usage to to ignore all indicators than the current demo setting
to force most of them to have blanc values.  I agree with Alexander that
indicators have meaning, and we use them here, but for recognising
fields and creating indexes most of the times it is better to ignore
them.  Finetuning will come later.  I'm proposing an incremental
*and* backwards compatible improvement.

Alexander rightly points out the classical second, non-filling indicator
for titles, that I'm locally fixing here since several years
(http://cdsware.cern.ch/lists/project-cdsware-users/archive/msg00452.shtml),
but it is mostly for title sorting and browsing.  But a title is a title
is a 245, regardless of its indicators ;-)

I have my own pile of patches for all bfe_*.py elements and *.xsl
stylesheets, and mostly it is just a matter of ignoring indicators.  I'd
happyly clean them from local usage patterns if there is interest
upstream.

Ferran

Reply via email to