https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=40300
--- Comment #14 from Alexander Wagner <[email protected]> --- (In reply to cgresser from comment #13) > At the moment Koha seems to fix globally punctuation "problems" which are > not a problem for a cataloguer who does use Marc21 rules! I had previously [...] > If the record is AACR2 > as opposed to RDA, then I believe that every 300 field should end in a > full-stop. Always! I think this is one of the examples where you could not (easily) do the punctuation automatically in general. It's a bit along my argument: I perfectly agree that IT people would have written cataloguing rules differently, but as you say, they are as they are. > [the full-stop removal is less of an issue, as most > people looking at our records do not know what should be there, but it is a > point in case for Koha globally changing the display of records it doesn't > understand the full syntax of!) IMHO _in general_ one _can't_. There are too many exceptions. Sometimes, it's hard for me to get cataloguing and rules into one sentence. In some areas it sounds more like a list of exceptions. Like German grammar ;) > I love KOHA a lot, but for Koha globally to chop punctuation off for end of [...] > adding things (the semi-colon), where we human beings do a good job of > following syntax. This doesn't make sense. I'd see a few more nuances here. In Marc there _is_ actually a mechanism to tell if you should add punctuation or not on a per record level. This is said leader (cf. https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bdleader.html): 18 - Descriptive cataloging form # - Non-ISBD a - AACR 2 c - ISBD punctuation omitted i - ISBD punctuation included n - Non-ISBD punctuation omitted u - Unknown I would argue, that if you set the leader 18 to `c` or `n` explicitly, then you as a cataloguer say: "I don't bother about punctuation. Dear computer do it for me as best you can." And it's your cataloguers conscious decision. So, IMHO in these cases Koha should try as best as it can to add punctuation. OTOH, it's better to leave the stuff _as is_ as our cataloguer told the system "don't touch the punctuation, I already did it". And if the display is still wrong IMHO it's time to _fix the record_. (By setting the leader appropriately and/or fixing the punctuation.) > If some Marc data has "mistakes" in them, either a diligent human being > needs to deal with them individually, or if desired with a global change for > _their_ catalogue/data. The Marc-approach seems to me even better than a global default as it is on the _per record_ level. E.g. one may ingest data from various sources via Z39.50, SRU, harvesting etc. So it may well happen that the source systems approach to punctuation differs. I learned that the union catalogue we use as our main source adds punctuation automatically so "non in the record" all the time, while my impression is that LoC _adds_ the punctuation to the records "all the time". Now we ingest from LoC if our union catalogue can't deliver => in general I end up with per record rules wrt punctuation. Without obeying the leader my fellow colleagues have to check punctuation in every record and fix it in every other or so. So, I think it would be nice to follow the data and act accordingly. > Applying a fix for some data globally, for everyone > who uses Koha uses a dictatorial approach which I haven't thought was Koha's > intention. That's a bit harsh. -- 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/
