Re: authority indexes to gather data from authority records only
On 3/2/2014 2:47 μμ, Alexander Wagner wrote: Anyway, I still have 500 because this is the default value for the 'demo' site :) Ah. It could be that when Chris did this stuff there were some peding issues in discussion or just a typo as well. Clarification: I have BOTH 400a and 500a for authority author index (so Chris did a wonderful job including them both), but it's the 500a that causes garbage in the relevant tables because it's heavily used with other bibliographic records (while 400a is not).
Re: authority indexes to gather data from authority records only
On 03.02.2014 13:36, Theodoros Theodoropoulos wrote: Hello Theodoros! BTW: we used 400 instead of 500 for synonyms. Did we do this one wrong? I don't think you did anything wrong there. 400 is 'see' and 500 is 'see also' for authorities. For alternative names 400 seems more proper, although both can be used without problem. (I think that 400 is mainly used if you want to directly point to another authority that deals with the same person -ie a name variant-, where 500 is used when you want to point to a relative or a more generic term/name). Anyway, I still have 500 because this is the default value for the 'demo' site :) Ah. It could be that when Chris did this stuff there were some peding issues in discussion or just a typo as well. I think this is where demo records come from. Additionally, in the discussion with Tibor/Chris back then we droped indicators from the demo records as usually CDS is ignorant about them. However, we use them a bit (if 999 fields would not be enough one could easily go for 9, right, and even allow for alphabethic indicators in case of lacking space ;) So the marcup we use at JuSER and friends is actually 1001_ for people using "Last, First" notation and actually telling this in the marcup via the indicators. This goes with 5001_ (and 4001_ in case). Still you're right, the idea that Marc Authority uses the same tags/indicators as Bibliographic and that there is acutally (at least per see) no difference between the type of records is "not so nice". The 980__aAUTHORITY notion is IMHO one way to go. -- Kind regards, Alexander Wagner Scientific Services / Scientific Publishing Central Library 52425 Juelich mail : a.wag...@fz-juelich.de phone: +49 2461 61-1586 Fax : +49 2461 61-6103 http://www.fz-juelich.de/zb/wp Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbH 52425 Juelich Sitz der Gesellschaft: Juelich Eingetragen im Handelsregister des Amtsgerichts Dueren Nr. HR B 3498 Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: MinDir Dr. Karl Eugen Huthmacher Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr. Achim Bachem (Vorsitzender), Karsten Beneke (stellv. Vorsitzender), Prof. Dr.-Ing. Harald Bolt, Prof. Dr. Sebastian M. Schmidt
Re: authority indexes to gather data from authority records only
On 3/2/2014 1:31 μμ, Alexander Wagner wrote: BTW: we used 400 instead of 500 for synonyms. Did we do this one wrong? I don't think you did anything wrong there. 400 is 'see' and 500 is 'see also' for authorities. For alternative names 400 seems more proper, although both can be used without problem. (I think that 400 is mainly used if you want to directly point to another authority that deals with the same person -ie a name variant-, where 500 is used when you want to point to a relative or a more generic term/name). Anyway, I still have 500 because this is the default value for the 'demo' site :) You see, I still don't have any usable authorities from an 'authority' collection (it's in the TODO list and I'm waiting for this feature to get more mature before I use it in production). Having said that, I'm keeping the default indexes from the latest master for better future compliance and so that I'll be able to test stuff :) Cheers, Theodoros
Re: authority indexes to gather data from authority records only
On 03.02.2014 12:27, Theodoros Theodoropoulos wrote: Hi! Hello everyone and apologies if this has been discussed (or even tackled). The issue I'm having is that authority-related indexes (ie authority author) are getting too large because some of the 'authority' fields that should be indexed coincide with some popular bibliographic fields (such as 500__a which is see also/personal name in authority records and note field in bibliographic records) and thus the relative index fills up with 'garbage'. Sortof in our discussions with Tibor while ago. Tibor might remember his musings whether the auth-index should be completely separated or not With that in mind, I think it would be nice to be able to restrict indexing to certain collections only. If this seems like a bad policy (and maybe it is), a check button could instead exist in the bibindexadmin page that could be used to indicate an authority-related index (and thus restrict the data gathered to authority-related records only). Does this seem reasonable? For me it definitely sounds sensible. In a way I think even the tag already exists as Authority Records should belong to the collection AUTHORITY (980__a). BTW: we used 400 instead of 500 for synonyms. Did we do this one wrong? -- Kind regards, Alexander Wagner Scientific Services / Scientific Publishing Central Library 52425 Juelich mail : a.wag...@fz-juelich.de phone: +49 2461 61-1586 Fax : +49 2461 61-6103 http://www.fz-juelich.de/zb/wp Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbH 52425 Juelich Sitz der Gesellschaft: Juelich Eingetragen im Handelsregister des Amtsgerichts Dueren Nr. HR B 3498 Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: MinDir Dr. Karl Eugen Huthmacher Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr. Achim Bachem (Vorsitzender), Karsten Beneke (stellv. Vorsitzender), Prof. Dr.-Ing. Harald Bolt, Prof. Dr. Sebastian M. Schmidt
authority indexes to gather data from authority records only
Hello everyone and apologies if this has been discussed (or even tackled). The issue I'm having is that authority-related indexes (ie authority author) are getting too large because some of the 'authority' fields that should be indexed coincide with some popular bibliographic fields (such as 500__a which is see also/personal name in authority records and note field in bibliographic records) and thus the relative index fills up with 'garbage'. With that in mind, I think it would be nice to be able to restrict indexing to certain collections only. If this seems like a bad policy (and maybe it is), a check button could instead exist in the bibindexadmin page that could be used to indicate an authority-related index (and thus restrict the data gathered to authority-related records only). Does this seem reasonable? Cheers, Theodoros
