The 'date entered on file' (MARC21: 008/0-5, UNIMARC: 100a/0=7) of a record created by duplication of an existing record should be set to the current date instead of having the value of the original record.
Created attachment 164556 [details] [review] Bug 36552: Update record 'date entered on file' when duplicating a record The 'date entered on file' (MARC21: 008/0-5, UNIMARC: 100a/0=7) of a record created by duplication of an existing record should be set to the current date instead of having the value of the original record. Test plan ========= 1. Check the 'date entered on file' of an existing biblio / authotiry record (MARC21: 008/0-5, UNIMARC: 100a/0=7). 2. Duplicate the record by Edit > Edit as new (duplicate) 3. Control the 'date entered on file' value - it will equal to that of the original record. 4. Apply the patch (restart plack). 5. Repeat step 2. 6. Check the date - it should be the current date.
Created attachment 164687 [details] [review] Bug 36552: Update record 'date entered on file' when duplicating a record The 'date entered on file' (MARC21: 008/0-5, UNIMARC: 100a/0=7) of a record created by duplication of an existing record should be set to the current date instead of having the value of the original record. Test plan ========= 1. Check the 'date entered on file' of an existing biblio / authotiry record (MARC21: 008/0-5, UNIMARC: 100a/0=7). 2. Duplicate the record by Edit > Edit as new (duplicate) 3. Control the 'date entered on file' value - it will equal to that of the original record. 4. Apply the patch (restart plack). 5. Repeat step 2. 6. Check the date - it should be the current date. Signed-off-by: Victor Grousset/tuxayo <victor@tuxayo.net>
It works! :) tested marc21 and unimarc
(with biblios and authorities)
(In reply to Janusz Kaczmarek from comment #0) > The 'date entered on file' (MARC21: 008/0-5, UNIMARC: 100a/0=7) of a record > created by duplication of an existing record should be set to the current > date instead of having the value of the original record. Hi Janusz, Do you have any supporting information for this statement?
(In reply to Marcel de Rooy from comment #5) > (In reply to Janusz Kaczmarek from comment #0) > > The 'date entered on file' (MARC21: 008/0-5, UNIMARC: 100a/0=7) of a record > > created by duplication of an existing record should be set to the current > > date instead of having the value of the original record. > > Hi Janusz, > Do you have any supporting information for this statement? Hi Marcel, Thank you for having a look at this. I would say, this is just the cataloguers knowledge, common sense, and interpretation of the term "date entered on file". From https://loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd008a.html: >>>>> 00-05 - Date entered on file Computer-generated, six-character numeric string that indicates the date the MARC record was created. Recorded in the pattern yymmdd. Pattern yymmdd is yy for the year, mm for the month, and dd for the day. The date entered on file in 008/00-05 is never changed. The date and time of latest transaction information in field 005 changes each time a transaction is made to the record. The latest transaction information enables an organization handling more than one version of a record to identify the most current version. The fill character (|) is not allowed in any of these positions. Field 008/00-05 is usually system generated. <<<<< The logic is: If you are creating a record in Koha with the function "Edit as new (duplicate)" it means, in fact, that you are creating a completely new record, with no connection to the original one, except that you want to use it as a template. Hence it should have the current date in 008/0-5 (and respectively 100 $a/0-7 in UNIMARC). Cataloguers I work with have asked for this since always and I put in in my installations, now sharing this with the community. NB the phrase "The date entered on file in 008/00-05 is never changed" from MARC 21 definition above should be, obviously, interpreted in respect to a specific record and not to all records that somebody has created being inspired by this record. This would have no sense, IMVHO.
(In reply to Janusz Kaczmarek from comment #6) > I would say, this is just the cataloguers knowledge, common sense, and > interpretation of the term "date entered on file". Yes, sounds okay to me. Couldnt find a more authorative answer myself than the LOC page you cited.
Created attachment 164800 [details] [review] Bug 36552: Update record 'date entered on file' when duplicating a record The 'date entered on file' (MARC21: 008/0-5, UNIMARC: 100a/0=7) of a record created by duplication of an existing record should be set to the current date instead of having the value of the original record. Test plan ========= 1. Check the 'date entered on file' of an existing biblio / authotiry record (MARC21: 008/0-5, UNIMARC: 100a/0=7). 2. Duplicate the record by Edit > Edit as new (duplicate) 3. Control the 'date entered on file' value - it will equal to that of the original record. 4. Apply the patch (restart plack). 5. Repeat step 2. 6. Check the date - it should be the current date. Signed-off-by: Victor Grousset/tuxayo <victor@tuxayo.net> Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Created attachment 164801 [details] [review] Bug 36552: (QA follow-up) Add POSIX module Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Created attachment 164802 [details] [review] Bug 36552: (QA follow-up) Add a theoretical check on $record Theoretically, it might be empty? Note the check too in the other script. Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Pushed for 24.05! Well done everyone, thank you!
Pushed to 23.11.x for 23.11.06
Backported to 23.05.x for upcoming 23.05.12