Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 008 field and leader
Hi, On Jun 26, 2011, at 8:14 AM, Dan Scott wrote: Alternately, we could teach open-ils.cat.biblio.record.xml.create to set 008/00-05 if they are blank or a placeholder value. The trigger is probably more versatile, as it would handle direct loads into the database and records created via other means as well as new records created via this particular API, but it also puts more load on our single point of failure. I favor using triggers to ensure consistency no matter how a bib makes its way into Evergreen. However, whether we add yet another trigger or attach the logic to open-ils.cat.biblio.record.xml.create, I think we're at the point where we should think about setting up a scheme for managing the transformations to be applied when a record is added or updated. In particular, I propose something like the following: config.metadata_transform id serial name text trigger text config.metadata_transform_profile id serial name text config.metadata_transform_profile_map profile_id int foreign key references config.metadata_transform_profile (id) transform_id int foreign key references config.metadat_transform (id) seq int Examples of transforms would include: * update_901 * update_005 * marc21_update_008_date Example transform profiles would include: bib_create_mandatory (includes update_901, update_005, marc21_update_008_date) bib_update_mandatory (update_901 and update_005 but not marc21_update_008_date) But, of course, this would open the door to *optional* profiles that would be applied when needed. For example, a transform profile could be applied for a particular Vandelay import (or, for that matter, export). Besides the flexibility that something like this would give us, it would also provide a way to separate MARC21-specific transforms from (say) transforms that apply only to UNIMARC. Aside: if we create this and it gets backported to a current release, should one of the placeholder values for open-ils.cat.biblio.record.xml.create going forward be '070101', at least until we update the MARC templates accordingly? Yes. Regards, Galen -- Galen Charlton Director of Support and Implementation Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source email: g...@esilibrary.com direct: +1 770-709-5581 cell: +1 404-984-4366 skype: gmcharlt web:http://www.esilibrary.com/ Supporting Koha and Evergreen: http://koha-community.org http://evergreen-ils.org Equinox is going to New Orleans! Please visit us at booth 550 at ALA Annual to learn more about Koha and Evergreen.
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 008 field and leader
Hi Mieke, I know with the 008 tag in Evergreen you can click on the line and highlight the 070101 and change it to the current date, e.g., 110625, and then just complete the 008 tag as you normally would, either directly in the text of the tag, or via the table/grid at the top of the MARC Editor screen. I hope this helps. Kindest Regards, Joel From: Mieke Stroo m...@iisg.nl Reply-To: Evergreen Discussion Group open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 14:41:56 +0200 To: Evergreen Discussion Group open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 008 field and leader Hi all, The IISG in Amsterdam is running EG 2.0.3. We noticed that the 008 field always starts with 070101, presumably January first 2007. Could anyone tell us how to have this date changed automatically when entering a new record? Is it possible to have a computer generated date in this field? The positions 0-4 and 12-16 in the leader are unclear to us. According to the MARC 21 standard this information should be computer generated. Is it alright to use a set number (00620) for the positions 0-4 and leave the positions 12-16 open? Mieke Stroo IISG Postbus 2169 1000 CD Amsterdam The Netherlands m...@iisg.nl
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 008 field and leader
We could add an ON CREATE trigger on biblio.record_entry to set the first six characters of 008 (if it exists in the record - I'm not sure we want to get into the business of creating 008 fields from scratch) by invoking to_char(create_date, 'YYMMDD') to get the properly formatted version of the date. This is probably something we should have in place out of the box; it's a relatively small piece of work for an additional standards compliance checkmark. Mieke, would you mind adding a wishlist item on this point to http://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen ? Dan On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Joel Harbottle joel.harbot...@hotmail.com.au wrote: Hi Mieke, I know with the 008 tag in Evergreen you can click on the line and highlight the 070101 and change it to the current date, e.g., 110625, and then just complete the 008 tag as you normally would, either directly in the text of the tag, or via the table/grid at the top of the MARC Editor screen. I hope this helps. Kindest Regards, Joel From: Mieke Stroo m...@iisg.nl Reply-To: Evergreen Discussion Group open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 14:41:56 +0200 To: Evergreen Discussion Group open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 008 field and leader Hi all, The IISG in Amsterdam is running EG 2.0.3. We noticed that the 008 field always starts with 070101, presumably January first 2007. Could anyone tell us how to have this date changed automatically when entering a new record? Is it possible to have a computer generated date in this field? The positions 0-4 and 12-16 in the leader are unclear to us. According to the MARC 21 standard this information should be computer generated. Is it alright to use a set number (00620) for the positions 0-4 and leave the positions 12-16 open? Mieke Stroo IISG Postbus 2169 1000 CD Amsterdam The Netherlands m...@iisg.nl
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 008 field and leader
Hi, On Jun 25, 2011, at 16:39, Dan Scott d...@coffeecode.net wrote: We could add an ON CREATE trigger on biblio.record_entry to set the first six characters of 008 (if it exists in the record - I'm not sure we want to get into the business of creating 008 fields from scratch) by invoking to_char(create_date, 'YYMMDD') to get the properly formatted version of the date. Such a trigger would work, but to avoid changing the recorded creation date of an imported record, it should set the date only if the 008/00-05 contains blanks or a placeholder value. Regards, Galen Equinox is going to New Orleans! Please visit us at booth 550 at ALA Annual to learn more about Koha and Evergreen.
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 008 field and leader
Hi all, The IISG in Amsterdam is running EG 2.0.3. We noticed that the 008 field always starts with 070101, presumably January first 2007. Could anyone tell us how to have this date changed automatically when entering a new record? Is it possible to have a computer generated date in this field? The positions 0-4 and 12-16 in the leader are unclear to us. According to the MARC 21 standard this information should be computer generated. Is it alright to use a set number (00620) for the positions 0-4 and leave the positions 12-16 open? Mieke Stroo IISG Postbus 2169 1000 CD Amsterdam The Netherlands m...@iisg.nl
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 008 field and leader
Mieke, On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 08:41:56AM -0400, Mieke Stroo wrote: The positions 0-4 and 12-16 in the leader are unclear to us. According to the MARC 21 standard this information should be computer generated. Is it alright to use a set number (00620) for the positions 0-4 and leave the positions 12-16 open? A MARC record consists of three parts: leader, directory, and field contents. Leader/0-4 encode the length (in bytes) of the whole record, and leader/12-16 encodes the offset (in bytes) from the beginning of the record to the beginning of the field contents -- in other words, the length of the leader plus the length of the directory. So they have to be exactly right, which is why they're computer generated. I don't know enough about EG to know if it will tolerate incorrect values, but I doubt it. Paul. -- Paul Hoffman p...@flo.org Systems Librarian Fenway Libraries Online c/o Wentworth Institute of Technology 550 Huntington Ave. Boston, MA 02115 (617) 445-2914 (617) 442-2384 (FLO main number)
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 008 field and leader
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Paul Hoffman p...@flo.org wrote: Mieke, On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 08:41:56AM -0400, Mieke Stroo wrote: The positions 0-4 and 12-16 in the leader are unclear to us. According to the MARC 21 standard this information should be computer generated. Is it alright to use a set number (00620) for the positions 0-4 and leave the positions 12-16 open? A MARC record consists of three parts: leader, directory, and field contents. Leader/0-4 encode the length (in bytes) of the whole record, and leader/12-16 encodes the offset (in bytes) from the beginning of the record to the beginning of the field contents -- in other words, the length of the leader plus the length of the directory. So they have to be exactly right, which is why they're computer generated. I don't know enough about EG to know if it will tolerate incorrect values, but I doubt it. Evergreen only deals with MARC in XML format, so the leader's length bytes are of no use. Upon export in binary MARC, the leader is appropriately adjusted. So, in fact, Evergreen tolerates incorrect (or more correctly, useless) data there, since it doesn't mean anything in XML. -- Mike Rylander | VP, Research and Design | Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: mi...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com
