Bug 34576 - wrong information about use of 942 in unimarc
Summary: wrong information about use of 942 in unimarc
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Documentation (show other bugs)
Version: 23.05
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low enhancement (vote)
Assignee: Bugs List
QA Contact: Testopia
Depends on:
Reported: 2023-08-18 16:08 UTC by Mathieu Saby
Modified: 2023-09-08 09:47 UTC (History)
0 users

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


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Mathieu Saby 2023-08-18 16:08:06 UTC
In https://koha-community.org/manual/23.05/en/html/cataloging.html#added-entry-elements-label it is said that 942$2,$6 and $c is used in UNIMARC installation in the same way as MARC21

It is not the case in my (unimarc) library, and it is not what is written in the wiki https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Holdings_data_fields_(9xx)

Is it hardcoded somewhere in Koha ?
Comment 1 Katrin Fischer 2023-08-24 16:46:30 UTC
The wiki page linked doesn't have any information about 942 use in MARC21, so I think the information about UNIMARC missing there is not really saying much.

I think the important bit would be verifying the mappings in the default UNIMARC frameworks as they are shipped with Koha now and the default indexing.
Comment 2 Mathieu Saby 2023-08-27 13:35:17 UTC
Indeed you are right

Koha/installer/data/mysql/en/marcflavour/unimarc/mandatory/unimarc_framework_DEFAULT.sql defines
942$0 : 'Koha issues (borrowed), all copies'
942$2 : 'Source of classification or shelving scheme'
942$6 : 'Koha normalized classification for sorting'
942$c : 'Koha item type'
942$s : 'Serial record flag'

But the french version only defines 942$0
The other fields (Koha item type...) are in 099

And french vendors (at least Biblibre) use their own templates based on the fr-FR template.

I wonder why french people have used 099 instead of 942
Comment 3 Mathieu Saby 2023-09-08 09:47:28 UTC
I'm writing to the french community to know more about this divergence