Hello, My catalogers are confused by how authorities are sorted in the cataloging "manage authorities" view. I wanted to understand the approach being taken by the current code, versus what the catalogers are expecting.
For example in our EG 2.2 and our now EG 2.4 system if we search for subject "jazz" the results look something like this (though the sub-field letters are not displayed)… 150 $aJazz 150 $aJazz $y1921-1930 150 $aJazz $zFrance $zParis $y1921-1930. 150 $aJazz $zNorth Carolina $zGastonia $y1921-1930. 150 $aJazz $y1931-1940 150 $aJazz $zFrance $zParis $y1931-1940. 150 $aJazz $zNorth Carolina $zGastonia $y1931-1940. 150 $aJazz $y1941-1950 150 $aJazz $zEngland $y1941-1950. 150 $aJazz $zFrance $zParis $y1941-1950. The catalogers would prefer that the sorting should instead look like this…. 150 $aJazz 150 $aJazz $y1921-1930 150 $aJazz $y1931-1940 150 $aJazz $y1941-1950 150 $aJazz $zFrance $zParis $y1921-1930. 150 $aJazz $zFrance $zParis $y1931-1940. 150 $aJazz $zFrance $zParis $y1941-1950. 150 $aJazz $zNorth Carolina $zGastonia $y1921-1930. 150 $aJazz $zNorth Carolina $zGastonia $y1931-1940. 150 $aJazz $zEngland $y1941-1950. Which is the way that the authorities searches look like within OCLC Connexion client when searching the OCLC authority file. I wonder if part of the confusion is that sometimes authority subfield letters are not sued in alphabetical order. For example, in these subject authority the subfield are used in this order $a, $z, $y. My understanding is that this old LP bug is referring to this sorting issue. https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/781008 This old bug needs to be re-filed because it combined more than one issue at a time, and I am just trying to research authority sorting to see if it should be refiled or turned into a wish-list item, etc. Thanks in advance, Yamil
