| Summary: | fix possible confusion between UNIMARC and MARC21 in some sysprefs | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Koha | Reporter: | Mathieu Saby <mathsabypro> |
| Component: | Cataloging | Assignee: | Mathieu Saby <mathsabypro> |
| Status: | CLOSED FIXED | QA Contact: | Testopia <testopia> |
| Severity: | trivial | ||
| Priority: | P5 - low | CC: | fridolin.somers, gmcharlt, m.de.rooy, magnus, mtompset, nengard |
| Version: | Main | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Change sponsored?: | --- | Patch complexity: | Trivial patch |
| Documentation contact: | Documentation submission: | ||
| Text to go in the release notes: | Version(s) released in: | ||
| Circulation function: | |||
| Attachments: |
[PATCH] Bug 11611: Rephrase description and examples of 5 MARC related sysprefs
Bug 11611: Rephrase description and examples of 5 MARC related sysprefs Bug 11611: Rephrase description and examples of 5 MARC related sysprefs |
||
|
Description
Mathieu Saby
2014-01-26 19:01:08 UTC
Created attachment 24734 [details] [review] [PATCH] Bug 11611: Rephrase description and examples of 5 MARC related sysprefs This patch rephrases the description or examples of 5 sysprefs: 1/ MARCAuthorityControlField008: "MARC" -> "MARC21" 2/ itemcallnumber: "Examples" -> "Examples (for MARC21 records)" 3/ DefaultLanguageField008: "Range 35-37" -> "Range 35-37 of MARC21 records" 4/ MARCOrgCode: "new MARC records" -> "new MARC21 records" 5/ UNIMARCAuthorityField100 description: "Do NOT include the date (position 00-05)." -> "position 08-35. Do NOT include the date (position 00-07)." It also adds description in sql systempreferences table for UNIMARCAuthorityField100, MARCAuthorityControlField008 and MARCOrgCode Test plan: Apply and run updatedatabase.pl Check the changes are taken into account in syspref administration page Check the changes are taken into account in systempreferences table (for UNIMARCAuthorityField100, MARCAuthorityControlField008 and MARCOrgCode) For "position 00-05" changed to "position 00-07" this patch fixes a little copy/paste mistake. In UNIMARC, date is stored in the 8 first bytes of 100 field in authority records. M. Saby I am wondering about NORMARC, RUSMARC, or other MARC variants which are more closely related to MARC21, but are not exactly MARC21. Is changing the MARC to MARC21 a good idea? Created attachment 25122 [details] [review] Bug 11611: Rephrase description and examples of 5 MARC related sysprefs This patch rephrases the description or examples of 5 sysprefs: 1/ MARCAuthorityControlField008: "MARC" -> "MARC21" 2/ itemcallnumber: "Examples" -> "Examples (for MARC21 records)" 3/ DefaultLanguageField008: "Range 35-37" -> "Range 35-37 of MARC21 records" 4/ MARCOrgCode: "new MARC records" -> "new MARC21 records" 5/ UNIMARCAuthorityField100 description: "Do NOT include the date (position 00-05)." -> "position 08-35. Do NOT include the date (position 00-07)." It also adds description in sql systempreferences table for UNIMARCAuthorityField100, MARCAuthorityControlField008 and MARCOrgCode Test plan: Apply and run updatedatabase.pl Check the changes are taken into account in syspref administration page Check the changes are taken into account in systempreferences table (for UNIMARCAuthorityField100, MARCAuthorityControlField008 and MARCOrgCode) Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl> (In reply to M. Tompsett from comment #3) > I am wondering about NORMARC, RUSMARC, or other MARC variants which are more > closely related to MARC21, but are not exactly MARC21. Is changing the MARC > to MARC21 a good idea? Just text :) In balance, we are improving the situation (esp. the number of leading chars..) Created attachment 25135 [details] [review] Bug 11611: Rephrase description and examples of 5 MARC related sysprefs This patch rephrases the description or examples of 5 sysprefs: 1/ MARCAuthorityControlField008: "MARC" -> "MARC21" 2/ itemcallnumber: "Examples" -> "Examples (for MARC21 records)" 3/ DefaultLanguageField008: "Range 35-37" -> "Range 35-37 of MARC21 records" 4/ MARCOrgCode: "new MARC records" -> "new MARC21 records" 5/ UNIMARCAuthorityField100 description: "Do NOT include the date (position 00-05)." -> "position 08-35. Do NOT include the date (position 00-07)." It also adds description in sql systempreferences table for UNIMARCAuthorityField100, MARCAuthorityControlField008 and MARCOrgCode Test plan: Apply and run updatedatabase.pl Check the changes are taken into account in syspref administration page Check the changes are taken into account in systempreferences table (for UNIMARCAuthorityField100, MARCAuthorityControlField008 and MARCOrgCode) Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl> Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com> (In reply to M. de Rooy from comment #5) > (In reply to M. Tompsett from comment #3) > > I am wondering about NORMARC, RUSMARC, or other MARC variants which are more > > closely related to MARC21, but are not exactly MARC21. Is changing the MARC > > to MARC21 a good idea? > > Just text :) In balance, we are improving the situation (esp. the number of > leading chars..) I don't know RUSMARC, I don't think it is supported in Koha. For NORMARC, you may be true, but I don't the exact degree of similarity between MARC21 and NORMARC. Magnus Enger is probably the only one to know that... If NORMARC people think it is important, they can add precisions regarding their format in an other patch. Mathieu I think often MARC21 and NORMARC are closer to each other than MARC21 and UNIMARC, so some of the MARC21 prefs might apply. Adding Magnus to the discussion. Thanks for thinking about NORMARC! NORMARC and MARC21 are very similar, but I don't have the time to look properly into this now. Feel free to push this patch if you like, I'll do a followup for NORMAC later, if necessary. Pushed to master. Thanks, Mathieu! Pushed to 3.14.x, will be in 3.14.07 |