Hello Esteban, [...] > Don’t worry Ferran, I was using the authors 100 vs 700 as an example, > but it is the same case for other fields where you want to do > aggregations like this one. About the indicators, don’t worry either > we take good care of them, if needed, you can make the distinction > between 1001_ and 100__ (I don’t know if this is even correct, it is > just an example).
the problem is more general in Invenio. You can take Marc21 and use a subset of it. Or just use a subset of the tags. Or interpret more strictly, more loosely, use more local tags or subfields. Marc21 is like a legal code (or a programming language, if you feel more confortable with), where there is flexibility. CERN may use a subset of Marc21 where most of the indicators are __. Ok, that's CERNs library decission. But if the Invenio developers claim that Invenio supports Marc21, you *must* allow other indicators there, and consider it valid. For example, take a quick look to the authors tag documentation: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd100.html http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd700.html http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd110.html http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd710.html http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd111.html http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd711.html http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd720.html So, the easiest solution accept any indicator in any tag. I may be some exception somewhere in some tag, but accepting any indicator is *much* better than only accepting __. The more Invenio codebase grows, the bigger the problem is. Thanks, Ferran
