Bug 16986 - Index 035$a as OCLC-Number,Identifier-standard
Summary: Index 035$a as OCLC-Number,Identifier-standard
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 6499
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Searching (show other bugs)
Version: Main
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low enhancement (vote)
Assignee: Srdjan Jankovic
QA Contact: Testopia
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2016-07-27 03:16 UTC by Srdjan Jankovic
Modified: 2016-08-02 05:18 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Change sponsored?: ---
Patch complexity: ---
Documentation contact:
Documentation submission:
Text to go in the release notes:
Version(s) released in:


Attachments
Bug 16986: Added 035 $a tag to search index as OCLC-Number (4.68 KB, patch)
2016-07-27 03:20 UTC, Srdjan Jankovic
Details | Diff | Splinter Review

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Srdjan Jankovic 2016-07-27 03:16:55 UTC

    
Comment 1 Srdjan Jankovic 2016-07-27 03:20:28 UTC
Created attachment 53740 [details] [review]
Bug 16986: Added 035 $a tag to search index as OCLC-Number
Comment 2 Srdjan Jankovic 2016-07-27 03:24:17 UTC
To test:

* Pick a record and populate 035$a with something
* Reindex
* Search for that something - the record above should be found
Comment 3 Katrin Fischer 2016-07-27 05:16:12 UTC
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 ***
Comment 4 Katrin Fischer 2016-07-27 05:20:11 UTC
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.
Comment 5 Katrin Fischer 2016-07-27 05:31:47 UTC
Maybe the easiest would be to have a more general alias (or however you'd call that with Zebra) for the index name?
Comment 6 Srdjan Jankovic 2016-07-27 05:37:42 UTC
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.
Comment 7 Katrin Fischer 2016-07-27 05:41:15 UTC
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
Comment 8 Srdjan Jankovic 2016-07-27 05:58:10 UTC
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

?
Comment 9 Katrin Fischer 2016-08-01 20:40:04 UTC
Hi Srdjan, I just saw that bug 6499 has passed QA - is this ok for you?
Comment 10 Srdjan Jankovic 2016-08-01 23:42:08 UTC
Totally.
Comment 11 Katrin Fischer 2016-08-02 05:18:37 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 6499 ***