http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11202
--- Comment #54 from mathieu saby <[email protected]> --- > > 1) In general I am having problems with pubdate and acqdate searches in > UNIMARC compared to their MARC21 equivalents Mathieu, could you please take > a look? Syntaxes I tried: > pubdate=yyyy, pubdate:yyyy > With QueryParser: pubdate(yyyy), acqdate(yyyy) I will take a look > 3) In general I am a bit worried about removing indexes. I can see, why > some subfields are not making much sense to index, I also have read > the comments on bug 11119, but some of the changes might be debatable. > For example the following change could break functionality some > libraries rely on. Maybe it would not hurt to keep those around? > > -#FIXME Fields 603, 630, 631, 632, 633, 634, 635, 636, 646 are not defined > in Unimarc, but may be used by some libraries. I don't know who added these indexes and why, but they were never used in Unimarc, so it was clearly a mistake to put them in standard configuration files. Maybe some french library made one day a very specific developpment using these fields (I'm thinking of Frantiq network, specialised in Archeology). Or maybe it is just a mistake... I will send a message to french list to warn everybody that if a library want to index those fields in 3.14 they need to edit the config files before reindexing. Mathieu Mathieu -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://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/
