On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Sandford, Mark<SANDF...@wpunj.edu>
> In this specific case, what the URL in the 856 points to is very important. If it's not pointing to the actual resource, it's of a very different use to the catalog than if it is. That, in my opinion, makes it worth both using and cleaning the data.To be clear, I agree with everything you're saying 100%.
>
I have two questions, though:
1) Given that false negatives mean that relevant 856es wouldn't
appear, how would find the offenders? Some out of band process (like
MARCEdit)?
2) Given #1, is this a realistic expectation of any library
considering implementing VuFind?
These questions aren't meant to be discouraging or dismissive -- I'm
trying to gauge the feasibility.
I've long touted that until these sorts of discrepancies are addressed
(as well as abandoning the 'record model' and 'a single template for
all resources' design), the 'next generation catalog' is really just
sort of polishing the turd. I realize that progress is incremental
and that gaining control of our interfaces is the first step.
However, Mark, I think you're pointing out that technology alone is
not going to fix all of our problems.
I really appreciate you bringing this up.
-Ross.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
_______________________________________________
VuFind-General mailing list
VuFind-...@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vufind-general
It should not be very difficult to create a custom indexing function to
handle indicators for 856 fields correctly. The getSortableTitle method
can be used a an example of how to look at the indicator values. (You
basically need to use marc4j classes and methods directly.)
-Bob Haschart
Andrew Nagy wrote:
> I would like to move this conversation over to the SolrMarc mailing
> list. This is really a discussion that needs to happen around
> SolrMarc since - as far as I am aware - SolrMarc ignores indicators.
> This would be a nice progression for it to allow this level on
> granularity in the configuration options. It would be nice to e able
> to map the 856u1 and 856u0 to the URL field. Any library that doesn't
> use indicators correctly can just map the 856u to the URL field.
>
> Andrew
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 10:17 AM, Ross Singer <rossf...@gmail.com
> <mailto:rossf...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Sandford,
> Mark<SANDF...@wpunj.edu <mailto:SANDF...@wpunj.edu>>
> <mailto:VuFind-...@lists.sourceforge.net>
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vufind-general
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
>Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
>royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
>server and web deployment.
>http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------