Summary: | Index 035$a as OCLC-Number,Identifier-standard | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Koha | Reporter: | Srdjan Jankovic <srdjan> |
Component: | Searching | Assignee: | Srdjan Jankovic <srdjan> |
Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | Testopia <testopia> |
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | P5 - low | CC: | tomascohen |
Version: | Main | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
See Also: | https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=6499 | ||
Change sponsored?: | --- | Patch complexity: | --- |
Documentation contact: | Documentation submission: | ||
Text to go in the release notes: | Version(s) released in: | ||
Circulation function: | |||
Attachments: | Bug 16986: Added 035 $a tag to search index as OCLC-Number |
Description
Srdjan Jankovic
2016-07-27 03:16:55 UTC
Created attachment 53740 [details] [review] Bug 16986: Added 035 $a tag to search index as OCLC-Number To test: * Pick a record and populate 035$a with something * Reindex * Search for that something - the record above should be found Hi Srdjan, please take a look at the discussion at bug 6499 - it's an index on the same field currently in failed qa, but could probably be saved easily. 035 can be all kinds of numbers - so we chose a more general name there. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 6499 *** Hm, your patch seems more complete - we could also also use yours an turn the duplicate around. But I think having a more general name would be good. Maybe the easiest would be to have a more general alias (or however you'd call that with Zebra) for the index name? Well I'm not sure how I missed that one when searching. Apologies. I'm happy to change it to whatever name/label is more appropriate. hi Srdjan, I feel like my early morning comments might not always make full sense :) See here for the documentation of the field: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd035.html Right, from that I take: 1. We may want to index $z subfield as well (as the other patch does) 2. a) We want to name it "System-control-number" rather than OCLC-Number, or alternatively 2. b) We drop new name all together and leave it as Identifier-standard, and include Identifier-standard in searched index list ? Hi Srdjan, I just saw that bug 6499 has passed QA - is this ok for you? Totally. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 6499 *** |