https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=37364
--- Comment #1 from Heather <[email protected]> --- > 773$d is not repeatable, so we should avoid to create 2 entries. Maybe check > for existence of 264 first and then fallback to 260 if the first is not > found? This should work! > 260 and 264 are both repeatable. I assume this either uses the first or last > entry - can you tell? Yes--both the 260 and the 264 would have first indicator = 3 for "current, latest." > Ideally it might be good to prefer the entry with first indicator = 3 > (current/latest), if it exists... Yes--this would work. Examples are here, on p.43: https://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/conser/CCM/module35.pdf E.g.: 264 #1 $3 1990-1994: $a Salem, N.H. : $b Butterworth Legal Publishers 264 21 $3 1995-<1996>: $a Charlottesville, VA : $b Michie 264 21 $3 <1998>-1999: $a Charlottesville, VA : $b LEXIS Law Pub. 264 31 $3 2000- : $a Huntington, NY : $b Juris Pub., $c c1990- > 2) This should take $n$p into account as well, as otherwise a multi-part > work will not be distinguishable from the title: Yes!!! > I think this could just be changed to: abnp for the subfield list. This order can be different in the 245, so IMO should be preserved in the 773, otherwise the title will make no sense, e.g. this 245's order is apnpb (from the MARC21 standard): 245 00$aDeutsche Bibliographie.$pWöchentliches Verzeichnis.$nReihe B,$pBeilage, Erscheinungen ausserhalb des Verlagsbuchhandels :$bAmtsblatt der Deutschen Bibliothek. So can the order of the subfields in the 245 be preserved in the created 773? --h2 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
