|
From: | Sebastian Hammer |
Subject: | Re: [Koha-zebra] .abs file and subfield ordering |
Date: | Wed, 15 Feb 2006 09:09:43 -0500 |
User-agent: | Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Macintosh/20050923) |
Joshua Ferraro wrote:
Some Russians have developed functionality that allows you to combine subfields into an index and do other fancy stuff. I haven't looked much at it myself.On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 11:47:09PM -0500, Sebastian Hammer wrote:Of course MARC must die... but I don't think this is a major issue. I've had extensive conversations with staff at the LoC about Zebra's weaknesses as pertains to MARC, so I'm acutely aware of the weaknesses, but I'm not sure this is one of them. Most of their concerns have concerned the ability to combine multiple subfields into one phrase index for scanning or complete subfield searching... I've never heard of a wish to control indexing based on what subfield follows what other subfield... others on the list may have other experiences (indeed, other formats than MARC21 may pose other challenges here).OK ... I won't worry about the ordering prob then ... with regardsto the multiple subfields in one phrase search, I have actually been saving that one :-). A while ago I found a thread on the lists:http://lists.indexdata.dk/pipermail/zebralist/2005-August/000875.html That seems to indicate there is a solution for that -- or am I reading it wrong?
The up-and-coming XSLT-based indexing system will allow *any* kind of crazy logic on the records to support indexing, including mapping the whole damn thing to sound like a pirate, aargh.. It should be easy enough to write some perl to map an old-style .abs to an XSLT-based filter if/when the need arises.
--Seb
Also, speaking of mappings, I've got a few CQL questions. So I understand the notion of a 'context set' and 'indexes' withinI'll defer to Mike, since he's on the editorial board. I imagine this might be something that'd be good to bring to the ZING list.each context set. I'm not clear on what the best context set would be for the MARC records in the libraries using Koha. bath?cql?Right ... I'll do that then.I think Bath has been roundly criticized for stopping short of mapping USE attributes (to say nothing of indexes) to MARC fields. The Bib-1 semantics document makes a half-baked effort, but I don't think anyone would consider it an authority today. I've heard some folks say that either the US national profile or the ZTexas profile actually specify mappings to MARC fields for the basic stuff.Also, though the bath context set defines indexes, it doesn't clearly specify mappings for those indexes into any specific record formatlike MARC. Are there specifications anywhere that define such mappings? Bib-1 maybe? MODS? Any suggestions?Finally, in some of the ABS files included with Zebra I see a ? after the tag like in this entry: elm 245 title - elm 245/? title !:w elm 245/?/a title !:w,!:p Is this a 'WildThing'? could someone explain what that means? :-)Thanks, I'll check those out.But the marc21.abs file that comes with Zebra should be a really good starting point for the most simple and obvious stuff. I developed that over several iterations with Larry Dixson of the LoC, and it was directly based on a set of requirements that they developed for their LIS vendor when they migrated to Voyager (of course, the vendor totally ignored them). And the folks at the LoC sure do know their MARC. :-)OK ... I'll check this out as well. Thanks! Cheers,
-- Sebastian Hammer, Index Data address@hidden www.indexdata.com Ph: (603) 209-6853
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |