On May 1, 2006, at 4:41 PM, Leif Andersson wrote:
+1
count can possibly be complemented or replaced with occurrence as
suggested.
It'd be nice to be able to denote last occurrence [-1].
And I suppose the indexing should be based on ordinary perl
subscript indexing - i.e. governed by the
On May 3, 2006, at 6:28 AM, Edward Summers wrote:
$field-delete_subfield(pos = 2);
won't work because 'pos' is a perl keyword--
I should've tried it before I said this -- it works fine in that
context, even though my perl syntax highlighter indicates otherwise.
So I've changed the
Edward Summers wrote:
The current documentation for the new method reads like this:
--
delete_subfield() allows you to remove subfields from a field:
# delete any subfield a in the field
$field-delete_subfield(code = 'a');
# delete any subfield a or u
Brad Baxter wrote:
On 5/3/06, Michael Kreyche [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The term position (pos) seems a little ambiguous to me on the face
of it. Does (code = 'u', pos = 0) mean the first subfield u (which
is what I take it to mean) or subfield u if it's the first subfield
(which it might
I've been using MARC::Record for a while to extract data using Perl to prepare
it for a publishing package (Ventura). This has all worked well for about a
year until it was spotted that a repeated subfield has been omitted. In the 245
record it is possible to have numerous $n and $p fields
On Wednesday, May 03, 2006 9:28 AM, Ed @ Go Britain wrote:
In the 245 record it is
possible to have numerous $n and $p fields which need to be
output with formating between the fields.
My knowledge of PERL isn't too good and I'm struggling to know
how to extract these repeated subfields and
On May 3, 2006, at 8:55 AM, Mark Jordan wrote:
I think it should mean the zeroth occurrence of subfield 'u',
since specifying which of a repeated group of subfields is a
realistic task, as you say. For example, each record has two 'u's
but all of the first ones are garbage.
Actually
Edward Summers wrote:
On May 3, 2006, at 8:55 AM, Mark Jordan wrote:
I think it should mean the zeroth occurrence of subfield 'u', since
specifying which of a repeated group of subfields is a realistic task,
as you say. For example, each record has two 'u's but all of the first
ones are
Ed, the only problem I can see with position in the field is if a
preceding subfield does not exist in every record. For example, in a
given batch, most but not all records have an 856 subfield 3, followed
by multiple subfield u's. If you ask to delete the first u using pos,
then your target
Bryan,
Many thanks for the quick response.
There are times when the proper order would be $a, $n, $p, $b, $c, as
well,
aren't there?
Thanks for the forwarning - I haven't been told that yet - I'm not involved
in the production of the data just in extracting it for publishing! This is
On May 3, 2006, at 11:25 AM, Mark Jordan wrote:
For example, in a given batch, most but not all records have an 856
subfield 3, followed by multiple subfield u's. If you ask to delete
the first u using pos, then your target will be different
determined by the presence of subfield 3. If
11 matches
Mail list logo
