Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
On 6/20/2014 9:20 AM, Donald Butterworth wrote: I agree with Janet, that the whole subject phrase needs to be kept together so that only the limited set displays when clicking on the phrase. There are lots of DLC authority records that include a main subject and subdivisions. I'm confused now. Are we still talking about the subject browse index or are we talking about the bib record? If we're talking about the subject browse index, I would agree, primarily because the user is presumably seeing a hierarchy of subjects where the broader term may be directly above the term they are looking at and the narrower term is directly below. The current behavior is that the link keeps the subject phrase together when you click on it, so no changes would be required here. If we're talking about the bib record, I have to say I put a lot of faith into what I'm sure is highly-funded usability testing done by Amazon. As Dan mentioned, the current link behavior for subject headings is similar to what Amazon is using. If the Evergreen community were to do a coordinated batch of usability testing (probably not a bad idea) and found that end users were indeed confused by the behavior, I might think differently, but I personally like the ability to click higher in the subject heading to broaden my search. Kathy
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
I think that Don is talking about something different -- a way to keyword search subject headings. Right now we have two subject search options: On the Basic and Advanced search screen, choosing subject and entering search terms gets you all the records that have that term in subject headings. Show me all the bib records that have the word Puffins somewhere in the subject headings. On the Browse search, you choose subject and enter search terms, and you are shown the alphabetical section of the index that starts with whatever you entered. You get to a list of subject headings and their subdivisions (at least if you've done your indexes as described earlier in this thread, and they have the subdivisions like Bibliomations. Keyword searching of subject headings would be saying Show me all the subject headings that include these search terms. If you entered Washington, for example, you'd get something like this: George Washington Bridge (New York, N.Y.) (3) Washington, Booker T., 1856-1915 (30) Washington, George 1732-1783 (100) That would be a great feature, something like Find Headings, but I wouldn't want to see it replace either the way subject searching on basic advanced or subject browse works now. On 6/20/2014 9:45 AM, Kathy Lussier wrote: On 6/20/2014 9:20 AM, Donald Butterworth wrote: I agree with Janet, that the whole subject phrase needs to be kept together so that only the limited set displays when clicking on the phrase. There are lots of DLC authority records that include a main subject and subdivisions. I'm confused now. Are we still talking about the subject browse index or are we talking about the bib record? If we're talking about the subject browse index, I would agree, primarily because the user is presumably seeing a hierarchy of subjects where the broader term may be directly above the term they are looking at and the narrower term is directly below. The current behavior is that the link keeps the subject phrase together when you click on it, so no changes would be required here. If we're talking about the bib record, I have to say I put a lot of faith into what I'm sure is highly-funded usability testing done by Amazon. As Dan mentioned, the current link behavior for subject headings is similar to what Amazon is using. If the Evergreen community were to do a coordinated batch of usability testing (probably not a bad idea) and found that end users were indeed confused by the behavior, I might think differently, but I personally like the ability to click higher in the subject heading to broaden my search. Kathy -- Elizabeth Thomsen, Member Services Manager NOBLE: North of Boston Library Exchange 26 Cherry Hill Drive Danvers MA 01923 E-mail: e...@noblenet.org
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
This is an interesting and useful idea (especially for catalogers!), but I'm not sure patrons would dig the intervening screen when performing the keyword subject search. It strikes that the function would be rather like a disambiguation page on Wikipedia. It might be nice might be nice if something like this displayed along with the search results, or if you got a link at the top of your search results directing you to it. --- Sarah Childs Technical Services Department Head Hussey-Mayfield Memorial Public Library 250 North Fifth Street Zionsville, IN 46077 317-873-3149 x13330 sar...@zionsville.lib.in.us On 2014-06-20 10:08, Elizabeth B. Thomsen wrote: I think that Don is talking about something different -- a way to keyword search subject headings. Right now we have two subject search options: On the Basic and Advanced search screen, choosing subject and entering search terms gets you all the records that have that term in subject headings. Show me all the bib records that have the word Puffins somewhere in the subject headings. On the Browse search, you choose subject and enter search terms, and you are shown the alphabetical section of the index that starts with whatever you entered. You get to a list of subject headings and their subdivisions (at least if you've done your indexes as described earlier in this thread, and they have the subdivisions like Bibliomations. Keyword searching of subject headings would be saying Show me all the subject headings that include these search terms. If you entered Washington, for example, you'd get something like this: George Washington Bridge (New York, N.Y.) (3) Washington, Booker T., 1856-1915 (30) Washington, George 1732-1783 (100) That would be a great feature, something like Find Headings, but I wouldn't want to see it replace either the way subject searching on basic advanced or subject browse works now. On 6/20/2014 9:45 AM, Kathy Lussier wrote: On 6/20/2014 9:20 AM, Donald Butterworth wrote: I agree with Janet, that the whole subject phrase needs to be kept together so that only the limited set displays when clicking on the phrase. There are lots of DLC authority records that include a main subject and subdivisions. I'm confused now. Are we still talking about the subject browse index or are we talking about the bib record? If we're talking about the subject browse index, I would agree, primarily because the user is presumably seeing a hierarchy of subjects where the broader term may be directly above the term they are looking at and the narrower term is directly below. The current behavior is that the link keeps the subject phrase together when you click on it, so no changes would be required here. If we're talking about the bib record, I have to say I put a lot of faith into what I'm sure is highly-funded usability testing done by Amazon. As Dan mentioned, the current link behavior for subject headings is similar to what Amazon is using. If the Evergreen community were to do a coordinated batch of usability testing (probably not a bad idea) and found that end users were indeed confused by the behavior, I might think differently, but I personally like the ability to click higher in the subject heading to broaden my search. Kathy -- Elizabeth Thomsen, Member Services Manager NOBLE: North of Boston Library Exchange 26 Cherry Hill Drive Danvers MA 01923 E-mail: e...@noblenet.org
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
And also in this discussion is the way subject headings work in the bib record display. When we first came up on Evergreen, our users found this somewhat confusing, too. In our former system, if you clicked on a subject heading in a bib record, you were doing a browse search on that complete heading. With a little time, though, people adjusted, and it made a big difference when we changed our separator from -- to . People seemed to immediately see these as breadcrumbs in a hierarchy. What I really like about the way this works is the flexibility to decide just how far you want to follow that subject heading. Sometimes these are very specific, much more specific than the users interest. Here's an example: Editors Massachusetts Fitchburg Biography We have only one title that matches this specific heading, but the person who is interested in this book may be interested in Editors Massachusetts or perhaps just Editors. -- Elizabeth Thomsen, Member Services Manager NOBLE: North of Boston Library Exchange 26 Cherry Hill Drive Danvers Massachusetts 01923 E-mail: e...@noblenet.org On Fri, June 20, 2014 10:08 am, Elizabeth B. Thomsen wrote: I think that Don is talking about something different -- a way to keyword search subject headings. Right now we have two subject search options: On the Basic and Advanced search screen, choosing subject and entering search terms gets you all the records that have that term in subject headings. Show me all the bib records that have the word Puffins somewhere in the subject headings. On the Browse search, you choose subject and enter search terms, and you are shown the alphabetical section of the index that starts with whatever you entered. You get to a list of subject headings and their subdivisions (at least if you've done your indexes as described earlier in this thread, and they have the subdivisions like Bibliomations. Keyword searching of subject headings would be saying Show me all the subject headings that include these search terms. If you entered Washington, for example, you'd get something like this: George Washington Bridge (New York, N.Y.) (3) Washington, Booker T., 1856-1915 (30) Washington, George 1732-1783 (100) That would be a great feature, something like Find Headings, but I wouldn't want to see it replace either the way subject searching on basic advanced or subject browse works now. On 6/20/2014 9:45 AM, Kathy Lussier wrote: On 6/20/2014 9:20 AM, Donald Butterworth wrote: I agree with Janet, that the whole subject phrase needs to be kept together so that only the limited set displays when clicking on the phrase. There are lots of DLC authority records that include a main subject and subdivisions. I'm confused now. Are we still talking about the subject browse index or are we talking about the bib record? If we're talking about the subject browse index, I would agree, primarily because the user is presumably seeing a hierarchy of subjects where the broader term may be directly above the term they are looking at and the narrower term is directly below. The current behavior is that the link keeps the subject phrase together when you click on it, so no changes would be required here. If we're talking about the bib record, I have to say I put a lot of faith into what I'm sure is highly-funded usability testing done by Amazon. As Dan mentioned, the current link behavior for subject headings is similar to what Amazon is using. If the Evergreen community were to do a coordinated batch of usability testing (probably not a bad idea) and found that end users were indeed confused by the behavior, I might think differently, but I personally like the ability to click higher in the subject heading to broaden my search. Kathy -- Elizabeth Thomsen, Member Services Manager NOBLE: North of Boston Library Exchange 26 Cherry Hill Drive Danvers MA 01923 E-mail: e...@noblenet.org
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
On 6/20/2014 9:20 AM, Donald Butterworth wrote: I agree with Janet, that the whole subject phrase needs to be kept together so that only the limited set displays when clicking on the phrase. There are lots of DLC authority records that include a main subject and subdivisions. I'm confused now. Are we still talking about the subject browse index or are we talking about the bib record? If we're talking about the subject browse index, I would agree, primarily because the user is presumably seeing a hierarchy of subjects where the broader term may be directly above the term they are looking at and the narrower term is directly below. The current behavior is that the link keeps the subject phrase together when you click on it, so no changes would be required here. Sorry. Don't mean to be confusing the issue. In this first paragraph I was commenting only on the Browse index, not the bib record. In the second paragraph I switched gears to the main Keyword Subject search results screen. What I was describing is the kind of behavior that Library of Congress Catalog http://catalog2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=localPAGE=First has when you do a Keyword Subject search. I find it very intuitive, but then again I am a cataloger. Don On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Kathy Lussier kluss...@masslnc.org wrote: On 6/20/2014 9:20 AM, Donald Butterworth wrote: I agree with Janet, that the whole subject phrase needs to be kept together so that only the limited set displays when clicking on the phrase. There are lots of DLC authority records that include a main subject and subdivisions. I'm confused now. Are we still talking about the subject browse index or are we talking about the bib record? If we're talking about the subject browse index, I would agree, primarily because the user is presumably seeing a hierarchy of subjects where the broader term may be directly above the term they are looking at and the narrower term is directly below. The current behavior is that the link keeps the subject phrase together when you click on it, so no changes would be required here. If we're talking about the bib record, I have to say I put a lot of faith into what I'm sure is highly-funded usability testing done by Amazon. As Dan mentioned, the current link behavior for subject headings is similar to what Amazon is using. If the Evergreen community were to do a coordinated batch of usability testing (probably not a bad idea) and found that end users were indeed confused by the behavior, I might think differently, but I personally like the ability to click higher in the subject heading to broaden my search. Kathy -- Don Butterworth Faculty Associate / Librarian III B.L. Fisher Library Asbury Theological Seminary don.butterwo...@asburyseminary.edu (859) 858-2227
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
I like Don's suggestion for how a subject search should work very much, though I would say that what he describes wouldn't really be a subject keyword search at all, but something new and significantly different from what Evergreen currently. If we really wanted to make such a search powerful, we would include the BT, NT, UF, and other data from the LCSH. As for the original question of how the subject links should behave on the browse screen, I definitely prefer for these to be a compete entity, though this is another place where the experience could be enhanced with BT, NT, UF, etc. Benjamin Kalish Forbes Library / 413-587-1012 / bkal...@forbeslibrary.org Currently reading: *1Q84 *by Haruki Murakami and *What Is Visible *by Kimberly Elkins Just Finished: *Seabiscuit: An American Legend *by Laura Hillenbrand Message: 3 Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 09:20:24 -0400 From: Donald Butterworth don.butterwo...@asburyseminary.edu Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index To: Evergreen Discussion Group open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org Message-ID: cacxgyx8uibdd8dt8r8itl9fccac_kdhhhlqnjawcjoqadqw...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 I agree with Janet, that the whole subject phrase needs to be kept together so that only the limited set displays when clicking on the phrase. There are lots of DLC authority records that include a main subject and subdivisions. In fact ... what I would love to see in the Subject Keyword Search is for the result display to have an intermediate screen based on the whole subject phrase. For example the subject keyword self in my database retrieves 1668 bib records. Not very helpful. Instead I would like to see it pull up any subject phrases that include the word self: English language -- Self-instruction (20) English teachers -- Self-rating of (1) Self (56) Self-acceptance (12) Self-acceptance -- Religious aspects (3) Self-acceptance -- Religious aspects -- Judaism (19) Self-actualization (Psychology) (112) Self-actualization (Psychology) in old age (4) Self-actualization (Psychology) -- Problems, exercises, etc. (5) Self, John, 1912-1993 -- Contributions in medicine (1) Anybody else like this alternative? Don
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
Hi Don,
I think there is another way you can get the catalog to display the
entire string. When MassLNC was testing this development with
Bibliomation, we noticed the same issue and were advised to set the All
Subjects index browse field to true to get the entire string to display
in the browse search. By default, the browse flag is set to false in
this index, and the subject browse is based on the geographic, name,
topic, time period subject indexes.
If you look at Bibliomation's catalog at http://acorn.biblio.org/,
you'll see that the browse search is displaying the complete subject
string (minus separators). I was just talking to Ben Shum about their
setup, and they do not have authority records loaded in their system
yet, but they were able to get the entire string to display by enabling
browse in the All Subjects index.
What I don't know is if a reingest is required after you set the browse
flag to true for an existing index in your system. Could anyone answer
that question?
One thing we would like to see is the separators added to those browse
headings.
Also, +1 to the idea of setting the All Subjects index to browse by
default so that you can get the entire string. In speaking to multiple
Evergreen sites, I have not heard from one that does not want the entire
subject string to display. I'll file a LP bug for that too.
Kathy
Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
kluss...@masslnc.org
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
On 6/6/2014 1:24 PM, Donald Butterworth wrote:
Thanks for the great response Mike!
For the subject browse, I'm not yet familiar enough with authority
record links in Evergreen to know if this is viable solution. There
are an incredible number of subject permutations which would make it
impossible to anticipate every possible subject that would be legitimate.
Is there any support out in Evergreen Land for making option two the
default? We really are out of step with the rest of the library
community. I can't think of another library system that has a subject
browse index, that doesn't include the entire subject phrase.
For the series browse, I'm pretty sure we didn't do anything special
to make it appear. It just show up after the upgrade ... which is real
good.
Is there any support in Evergreen Land to include Series Browse as a
default that excludes the subfield v as part of the indexing?
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Mike Rylander mrylan...@gmail.com
mailto:mrylan...@gmail.com wrote:
Don,
For the subjects, there are two ways to handle it. The first is to
add authority records and link those to the appropriate bib records.
This will get you what you want without any further configuration, as
authority is browse-indexed the way you describe by default.
The second way involves new configuration entries and a partial
reingest, but it can certainly be done. You'll need a new
browse-specific indexing definition to replace the one that's
piggybacking on the exiting topic index. For the 650, something along
the lines of:
INSERT INTO config.metabib_field (name, field_class, label, format,
xpath, search_field, facet_field, browse_field, authority_xpath,
browse_xpath)
VALUES ('browse_topic', 'subject', 'Browse Topic', 'marcxml',
'//marc:datafield[@tag=650]', false, false, true, '//*[@code=0]',
'//*[contains(avxyz,@code)]');
UPDATE config.metabib_field SET browse_field = false WHERE name =
'topic' AND field_class = 'subject';
All of that can also be done in the staff client through Admin -
Server Administration - MARC Search/Facet Fields. After that, you'll
need to perform a browse reingest after hours. Something like the
following will do it in one fell swoop:
SELECT metabib.reingest_metabib_field_entries(id, TRUE, FALSE, TRUE)
FROM biblio.record_entry;
DELETE FROM metabib.browse_entry WHERE id NOT IN (SELECT entry FROM
metabib.browse_entry_def_map UNION SELECT entry FROM
metabib.browse_entry_simple_heading_map);
Series is not indexed for browse by default, so I assume you mean the
series facet? Assuming so, you could replace the MODS-based XPath for
the Series Title indexing definition with one that goes directly to
the MARC and excludes the fields you don't want. That would be more
involved, though. See here for the current mapping used:
http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-mapping.html#relateditem
HTH,
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Donald Butterworth
don.butterwo...@asburyseminary.edu
mailto:don.butterwo...@asburyseminary.edu wrote:
Colleagues,
We recently upgraded to the 2.5.2 release and, as a cataloger, I was
ecstatic to find that Browse the Catalog is now available. I
will use this
feature extensively when assigning author names, series, and
subjects.
The
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
Hi all,
I've filed two Launchpad bugs as a follow-up to this discussion.
All Subjects index should be set to browse by default -
https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/1331524.
Subject browse searching should display separators
https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/1331506
Kathy
Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
kluss...@masslnc.org
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
On 6/18/2014 10:14 AM, Kathy Lussier wrote:
Hi Don,
I think there is another way you can get the catalog to display the
entire string. When MassLNC was testing this development with
Bibliomation, we noticed the same issue and were advised to set the
All Subjects index browse field to true to get the entire string to
display in the browse search. By default, the browse flag is set to
false in this index, and the subject browse is based on the
geographic, name, topic, time period subject indexes.
If you look at Bibliomation's catalog at http://acorn.biblio.org/,
you'll see that the browse search is displaying the complete subject
string (minus separators). I was just talking to Ben Shum about their
setup, and they do not have authority records loaded in their system
yet, but they were able to get the entire string to display by
enabling browse in the All Subjects index.
What I don't know is if a reingest is required after you set the
browse flag to true for an existing index in your system. Could anyone
answer that question?
One thing we would like to see is the separators added to those browse
headings.
Also, +1 to the idea of setting the All Subjects index to browse by
default so that you can get the entire string. In speaking to multiple
Evergreen sites, I have not heard from one that does not want the
entire subject string to display. I'll file a LP bug for that too.
Kathy
Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
kluss...@masslnc.org
Twitter:http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
On 6/6/2014 1:24 PM, Donald Butterworth wrote:
Thanks for the great response Mike!
For the subject browse, I'm not yet familiar enough with authority
record links in Evergreen to know if this is viable solution. There
are an incredible number of subject permutations which would make it
impossible to anticipate every possible subject that would be
legitimate.
Is there any support out in Evergreen Land for making option two the
default? We really are out of step with the rest of the library
community. I can't think of another library system that has a subject
browse index, that doesn't include the entire subject phrase.
For the series browse, I'm pretty sure we didn't do anything special
to make it appear. It just show up after the upgrade ... which is
real good.
Is there any support in Evergreen Land to include Series Browse as a
default that excludes the subfield v as part of the indexing?
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Mike Rylander mrylan...@gmail.com
mailto:mrylan...@gmail.com wrote:
Don,
For the subjects, there are two ways to handle it. The first is to
add authority records and link those to the appropriate bib records.
This will get you what you want without any further configuration, as
authority is browse-indexed the way you describe by default.
The second way involves new configuration entries and a partial
reingest, but it can certainly be done. You'll need a new
browse-specific indexing definition to replace the one that's
piggybacking on the exiting topic index. For the 650, something
along
the lines of:
INSERT INTO config.metabib_field (name, field_class, label, format,
xpath, search_field, facet_field, browse_field, authority_xpath,
browse_xpath)
VALUES ('browse_topic', 'subject', 'Browse Topic', 'marcxml',
'//marc:datafield[@tag=650]', false, false, true, '//*[@code=0]',
'//*[contains(avxyz,@code)]');
UPDATE config.metabib_field SET browse_field = false WHERE name =
'topic' AND field_class = 'subject';
All of that can also be done in the staff client through Admin -
Server Administration - MARC Search/Facet Fields. After that,
you'll
need to perform a browse reingest after hours. Something like the
following will do it in one fell swoop:
SELECT metabib.reingest_metabib_field_entries(id, TRUE, FALSE, TRUE)
FROM biblio.record_entry;
DELETE FROM metabib.browse_entry WHERE id NOT IN (SELECT entry FROM
metabib.browse_entry_def_map UNION SELECT entry FROM
metabib.browse_entry_simple_heading_map);
Series is not indexed for browse by default, so I assume you mean the
series facet? Assuming so, you could replace the MODS-based
XPath for
the Series Title indexing definition with one that goes directly to
the MARC and excludes the fields you don't want. That would be more
involved, though. See here for the current mapping used:
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
Kathy and Don,
To the separator issue, those can certainly be added, but not without
adjusting the search-oriented All Subjects index. You'd need to (at
least) set the joiner field to ' -- ' (note the spaces!), add a
browse_xpath of '//*', and to set browse_field=TRUE. Then a reingest.
If testing that, I'd suggest picking a few records to try it with
first, of course.
This will be create entries for the full subject heading in addition
to the separated ones from the topic, name, etc subject indexes. My
previously mentioned method would be more cataloging correct.
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Kathy Lussier kluss...@masslnc.org wrote:
Hi Don,
I think there is another way you can get the catalog to display the entire
string. When MassLNC was testing this development with Bibliomation, we
noticed the same issue and were advised to set the All Subjects index
browse field to true to get the entire string to display in the browse
search. By default, the browse flag is set to false in this index, and the
subject browse is based on the geographic, name, topic, time period subject
indexes.
If you look at Bibliomation's catalog at http://acorn.biblio.org/, you'll
see that the browse search is displaying the complete subject string (minus
separators). I was just talking to Ben Shum about their setup, and they do
not have authority records loaded in their system yet, but they were able to
get the entire string to display by enabling browse in the All Subjects
index.
What I don't know is if a reingest is required after you set the browse flag
to true for an existing index in your system. Could anyone answer that
question?
One thing we would like to see is the separators added to those browse
headings.
Also, +1 to the idea of setting the All Subjects index to browse by default
so that you can get the entire string. In speaking to multiple Evergreen
sites, I have not heard from one that does not want the entire subject
string to display. I'll file a LP bug for that too.
Kathy
Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
kluss...@masslnc.org
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
On 6/6/2014 1:24 PM, Donald Butterworth wrote:
Thanks for the great response Mike!
For the subject browse, I'm not yet familiar enough with authority record
links in Evergreen to know if this is viable solution. There are an
incredible number of subject permutations which would make it impossible to
anticipate every possible subject that would be legitimate.
Is there any support out in Evergreen Land for making option two the
default? We really are out of step with the rest of the library community. I
can't think of another library system that has a subject browse index, that
doesn't include the entire subject phrase.
For the series browse, I'm pretty sure we didn't do anything special to make
it appear. It just show up after the upgrade ... which is real good.
Is there any support in Evergreen Land to include Series Browse as a default
that excludes the subfield v as part of the indexing?
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Mike Rylander mrylan...@gmail.com wrote:
Don,
For the subjects, there are two ways to handle it. The first is to
add authority records and link those to the appropriate bib records.
This will get you what you want without any further configuration, as
authority is browse-indexed the way you describe by default.
The second way involves new configuration entries and a partial
reingest, but it can certainly be done. You'll need a new
browse-specific indexing definition to replace the one that's
piggybacking on the exiting topic index. For the 650, something along
the lines of:
INSERT INTO config.metabib_field (name, field_class, label, format,
xpath, search_field, facet_field, browse_field, authority_xpath,
browse_xpath)
VALUES ('browse_topic', 'subject', 'Browse Topic', 'marcxml',
'//marc:datafield[@tag=650]', false, false, true, '//*[@code=0]',
'//*[contains(avxyz,@code)]');
UPDATE config.metabib_field SET browse_field = false WHERE name =
'topic' AND field_class = 'subject';
All of that can also be done in the staff client through Admin -
Server Administration - MARC Search/Facet Fields. After that, you'll
need to perform a browse reingest after hours. Something like the
following will do it in one fell swoop:
SELECT metabib.reingest_metabib_field_entries(id, TRUE, FALSE, TRUE)
FROM biblio.record_entry;
DELETE FROM metabib.browse_entry WHERE id NOT IN (SELECT entry FROM
metabib.browse_entry_def_map UNION SELECT entry FROM
metabib.browse_entry_simple_heading_map);
Series is not indexed for browse by default, so I assume you mean the
series facet? Assuming so, you could replace the MODS-based XPath for
the Series Title indexing definition with one that goes directly to
the MARC and excludes the fields you don't want. That would be more
involved, though. See here
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
I apologize if I'm misunderstanding this. Will the separators cause the subject in the browse list to behave the same way the headings do in our bib record display? I think subject headings in browse and in the bib record should be treated as a complete entity, not as separate topics. I looked at Bibliomation's index and if I click on United States History Civil War, 1861-1865 Women I get the 55 entries which is the number in parentheses after that link. Currently in our bib record displays the subject headings have separators. So the subject heading looks like this: United StatesHistoryCivil War, 1861-1865Women. If I click on 'United States' the search is for just that part of the subject. If I click on 'History' the search is for 'United StatesHistory'. If I want to search women in the Civil War I have to click on 'Women' to search the entire subject phrase. The unfortunate scenario here is that clicking on the beginning of the subject phrase searches only 'United States' and the search times out so a patron gets sorry no entries were found for 'United States'. Which separate term clicked on determines what gets searched. It is not very intuitive to know that you have to *start at the end* to make the search more specific. Janet Janet Schrader C/W MARS Inc. Supervisor of Bibliographic Services 67 Millbrook Street, Suite 201 Worcester, MA 01606 tel: 508-755-3323 ext. 25 fax: 508-757-7801 jschra...@cwmars.org -Original Message- From: open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Mike Rylander Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 1:13 PM To: Evergreen Discussion Group Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index Kathy and Don, To the separator issue, those can certainly be added, but not without adjusting the search-oriented All Subjects index. You'd need to (at least) set the joiner field to ' -- ' (note the spaces!), add a browse_xpath of '//*', and to set browse_field=TRUE. Then a reingest. If testing that, I'd suggest picking a few records to try it with first, of course. This will be create entries for the full subject heading in addition to the separated ones from the topic, name, etc subject indexes. My previously mentioned method would be more cataloging correct. On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Kathy Lussier kluss...@masslnc.org wrote: Hi Don, I think there is another way you can get the catalog to display the entire string. When MassLNC was testing this development with Bibliomation, we noticed the same issue and were advised to set the All Subjects index browse field to true to get the entire string to display in the browse search. By default, the browse flag is set to false in this index, and the subject browse is based on the geographic, name, topic, time period subject indexes. If you look at Bibliomation's catalog at http://acorn.biblio.org/, you'll see that the browse search is displaying the complete subject string (minus separators). I was just talking to Ben Shum about their setup, and they do not have authority records loaded in their system yet, but they were able to get the entire string to display by enabling browse in the All Subjects index. What I don't know is if a reingest is required after you set the browse flag to true for an existing index in your system. Could anyone answer that question? One thing we would like to see is the separators added to those browse headings. Also, +1 to the idea of setting the All Subjects index to browse by default so that you can get the entire string. In speaking to multiple Evergreen sites, I have not heard from one that does not want the entire subject string to display. I'll file a LP bug for that too. Kathy Kathy Lussier Project Coordinator Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative (508) 343-0128 kluss...@masslnc.org Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier On 6/6/2014 1:24 PM, Donald Butterworth wrote: Thanks for the great response Mike! For the subject browse, I'm not yet familiar enough with authority record links in Evergreen to know if this is viable solution. There are an incredible number of subject permutations which would make it impossible to anticipate every possible subject that would be legitimate. Is there any support out in Evergreen Land for making option two the default? We really are out of step with the rest of the library community. I can't think of another library system that has a subject browse index, that doesn't include the entire subject phrase. For the series browse, I'm pretty sure we didn't do anything special to make it appear. It just show up after the upgrade ... which is real good. Is there any support in Evergreen Land to include Series Browse as a default that excludes the subfield v as part of the indexing? On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Mike Rylander mrylan...@gmail.com wrote: Don
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
Thank you Mike! Although this method wouldn't leverage authority control, I know our original hope was that the browse feature could be used with or without authority records, with authority control enhancing the browse. If we were to display the full headings with the separators in the subject browse, it would bring us a long way towards making the subject browse more useful. Our favorite example of why separators are really needed for the display can be seen at http://acorn.biblio.org/eg/opac/browse?blimit=10qtype=subjectbterm=penguins+predators+of+juvenilelocg=1. Mike, if we wanted the subjects to display the same as they do in the bib record with the greater than symbol, would we then set the joiner field to ' ' ? Also, are there any downsides to adding this separator? For example, is it going to display a separator to some odd location where we might want to see it. In addition to the browse list, I'm guessing it would display the separator in autosuggest. Anywhere else? Thank you! Kathy Kathy Lussier Project Coordinator Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative (508) 343-0128 kluss...@masslnc.org Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier On 6/18/2014 1:12 PM, Mike Rylander wrote: Kathy and Don, To the separator issue, those can certainly be added, but not without adjusting the search-oriented All Subjects index. You'd need to (at least) set the joiner field to ' -- ' (note the spaces!), add a browse_xpath of '//*', and to set browse_field=TRUE. Then a reingest. If testing that, I'd suggest picking a few records to try it with first, of course. This will be create entries for the full subject heading in addition to the separated ones from the topic, name, etc subject indexes. My previously mentioned method would be more cataloging correct. On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Kathy Lussier kluss...@masslnc.org wrote: Hi Don, I think there is another way you can get the catalog to display the entire string. When MassLNC was testing this development with Bibliomation, we noticed the same issue and were advised to set the All Subjects index browse field to true to get the entire string to display in the browse search. By default, the browse flag is set to false in this index, and the subject browse is based on the geographic, name, topic, time period subject indexes. If you look at Bibliomation's catalog at http://acorn.biblio.org/, you'll see that the browse search is displaying the complete subject string (minus separators). I was just talking to Ben Shum about their setup, and they do not have authority records loaded in their system yet, but they were able to get the entire string to display by enabling browse in the All Subjects index. What I don't know is if a reingest is required after you set the browse flag to true for an existing index in your system. Could anyone answer that question? One thing we would like to see is the separators added to those browse headings. Also, +1 to the idea of setting the All Subjects index to browse by default so that you can get the entire string. In speaking to multiple Evergreen sites, I have not heard from one that does not want the entire subject string to display. I'll file a LP bug for that too. Kathy Kathy Lussier Project Coordinator Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative (508) 343-0128 kluss...@masslnc.org Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier On 6/6/2014 1:24 PM, Donald Butterworth wrote: Thanks for the great response Mike! For the subject browse, I'm not yet familiar enough with authority record links in Evergreen to know if this is viable solution. There are an incredible number of subject permutations which would make it impossible to anticipate every possible subject that would be legitimate. Is there any support out in Evergreen Land for making option two the default? We really are out of step with the rest of the library community. I can't think of another library system that has a subject browse index, that doesn't include the entire subject phrase. For the series browse, I'm pretty sure we didn't do anything special to make it appear. It just show up after the upgrade ... which is real good. Is there any support in Evergreen Land to include Series Browse as a default that excludes the subfield v as part of the indexing? On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Mike Rylander mrylan...@gmail.com wrote: Don, For the subjects, there are two ways to handle it. The first is to add authority records and link those to the appropriate bib records. This will get you what you want without any further configuration, as authority is browse-indexed the way you describe by default. The second way involves new configuration entries and a partial reingest, but it can certainly be done. You'll need a new browse-specific indexing definition to replace the one that's piggybacking on the exiting topic index. For the 650, something along the lines of: INSERT INTO config.metabib_field (name, field_class, label,
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 06:10:11PM +, Janet Schrader wrote: I apologize if I'm misunderstanding this. Will the separators cause the subject in the browse list to behave the same way the headings do in our bib record display? I think subject headings in browse and in the bib record should be treated as a complete entity, not as separate topics. I looked at Bibliomation's index and if I click on United States History Civil War, 1861-1865 Women I get the 55 entries which is the number in parentheses after that link. Currently in our bib record displays the subject headings have separators. So the subject heading looks like this: United StatesHistoryCivil War, 1861-1865Women. If I click on 'United States' the search is for just that part of the subject. If I click on 'History' the search is for 'United StatesHistory'. If I want to search women in the Civil War I have to click on 'Women' to search the entire subject phrase. The unfortunate scenario here is that clicking on the beginning of the subject phrase searches only 'United States' and the search times out so a patron gets sorry no entries were found for 'United States'. Which separate term clicked on determines what gets searched. It is not very intuitive to know that you have to *start at the end* to make the search more specific. Hmm. The current behaviour seems intuitive to me, but I think I had a hand in designing and implementing it, so that's probably not surprising. For what it's worth, Amazon seems to use exactly this scheme for enabling users to broaden and narrow their searches in their best seller ranking system once they've landed on an item (see http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B00JKT6VVY for an example). Do you have an alternative suggestion for representing subject headings so that it is both possible and more intuitive to search for just United States History Civil War, 1861-1865 in your example, if a user wanted to broaden their search from the initial record on which they might have landed? While I agree that it's unfortunate that broad search terms result in search time outs, that's a different problem and it should not drive how we represent subject headings.
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
Colleagues, We recently upgraded to the 2.5.2 release and, as a cataloger, I was ecstatic to find that Browse the Catalog is now available. I will use this feature extensively when assigning author names, series, and subjects. The author and title indexes looks great, but there is one tweak in the subject index and one in series that I want to make. *In subjects* each individual subject subfield is being indexed rather than the whole line. For example: 650 0 Conflict management -- Religious aspects -- Christianity is being displayed in the results list as * Conflict management * Religious aspects * Christianity What do I need to do to change this? *In series* I don't want the subfield v to be included in the results list display. For example: Tyndale studies ; v. 1 (1) Tyndale studies ; v. 2 (1) Tyndale studies ; v. 3 (1) should display as Tyndale studies ; (3) Again, what do we need to do to change this? Thanks for you insights! Don -- Don Butterworth Faculty Associate / Librarian III B.L. Fisher Library Asbury Theological Seminary don.butterwo...@asburyseminary.edu (859) 858-2227
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
Don,
For the subjects, there are two ways to handle it. The first is to
add authority records and link those to the appropriate bib records.
This will get you what you want without any further configuration, as
authority is browse-indexed the way you describe by default.
The second way involves new configuration entries and a partial
reingest, but it can certainly be done. You'll need a new
browse-specific indexing definition to replace the one that's
piggybacking on the exiting topic index. For the 650, something along
the lines of:
INSERT INTO config.metabib_field (name, field_class, label, format,
xpath, search_field, facet_field, browse_field, authority_xpath,
browse_xpath)
VALUES ('browse_topic', 'subject', 'Browse Topic', 'marcxml',
'//marc:datafield[@tag=650]', false, false, true, '//*[@code=0]',
'//*[contains(avxyz,@code)]');
UPDATE config.metabib_field SET browse_field = false WHERE name =
'topic' AND field_class = 'subject';
All of that can also be done in the staff client through Admin -
Server Administration - MARC Search/Facet Fields. After that, you'll
need to perform a browse reingest after hours. Something like the
following will do it in one fell swoop:
SELECT metabib.reingest_metabib_field_entries(id, TRUE, FALSE, TRUE)
FROM biblio.record_entry;
DELETE FROM metabib.browse_entry WHERE id NOT IN (SELECT entry FROM
metabib.browse_entry_def_map UNION SELECT entry FROM
metabib.browse_entry_simple_heading_map);
Series is not indexed for browse by default, so I assume you mean the
series facet? Assuming so, you could replace the MODS-based XPath for
the Series Title indexing definition with one that goes directly to
the MARC and excludes the fields you don't want. That would be more
involved, though. See here for the current mapping used:
http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-mapping.html#relateditem
HTH,
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Donald Butterworth
don.butterwo...@asburyseminary.edu wrote:
Colleagues,
We recently upgraded to the 2.5.2 release and, as a cataloger, I was
ecstatic to find that Browse the Catalog is now available. I will use this
feature extensively when assigning author names, series, and subjects.
The author and title indexes looks great, but there is one tweak in the
subject index and one in series that I want to make.
In subjects each individual subject subfield is being indexed rather than
the whole line. For example:
650 0 Conflict management -- Religious aspects -- Christianity
is being displayed in the results list as
* Conflict management
* Religious aspects
* Christianity
What do I need to do to change this?
In series I don't want the subfield v to be included in the results list
display. For example:
Tyndale studies ; v. 1 (1)
Tyndale studies ; v. 2 (1)
Tyndale studies ; v. 3 (1)
should display as
Tyndale studies ; (3)
Again, what do we need to do to change this?
Thanks for you insights!
Don
--
Don Butterworth
Faculty Associate / Librarian III
B.L. Fisher Library
Asbury Theological Seminary
don.butterwo...@asburyseminary.edu
(859) 858-2227
--
Mike Rylander
| Director of Research and Development
| 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
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
Thanks for the great response Mike!
For the subject browse, I'm not yet familiar enough with authority record
links in Evergreen to know if this is viable solution. There are an
incredible number of subject permutations which would make it impossible to
anticipate every possible subject that would be legitimate.
Is there any support out in Evergreen Land for making option two the
default? We really are out of step with the rest of the library community.
I can't think of another library system that has a subject browse index,
that doesn't include the entire subject phrase.
For the series browse, I'm pretty sure we didn't do anything special to
make it appear. It just show up after the upgrade ... which is real good.
Is there any support in Evergreen Land to include Series Browse as a
default that excludes the subfield v as part of the indexing?
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Mike Rylander mrylan...@gmail.com wrote:
Don,
For the subjects, there are two ways to handle it. The first is to
add authority records and link those to the appropriate bib records.
This will get you what you want without any further configuration, as
authority is browse-indexed the way you describe by default.
The second way involves new configuration entries and a partial
reingest, but it can certainly be done. You'll need a new
browse-specific indexing definition to replace the one that's
piggybacking on the exiting topic index. For the 650, something along
the lines of:
INSERT INTO config.metabib_field (name, field_class, label, format,
xpath, search_field, facet_field, browse_field, authority_xpath,
browse_xpath)
VALUES ('browse_topic', 'subject', 'Browse Topic', 'marcxml',
'//marc:datafield[@tag=650]', false, false, true, '//*[@code=0]',
'//*[contains(avxyz,@code)]');
UPDATE config.metabib_field SET browse_field = false WHERE name =
'topic' AND field_class = 'subject';
All of that can also be done in the staff client through Admin -
Server Administration - MARC Search/Facet Fields. After that, you'll
need to perform a browse reingest after hours. Something like the
following will do it in one fell swoop:
SELECT metabib.reingest_metabib_field_entries(id, TRUE, FALSE, TRUE)
FROM biblio.record_entry;
DELETE FROM metabib.browse_entry WHERE id NOT IN (SELECT entry FROM
metabib.browse_entry_def_map UNION SELECT entry FROM
metabib.browse_entry_simple_heading_map);
Series is not indexed for browse by default, so I assume you mean the
series facet? Assuming so, you could replace the MODS-based XPath for
the Series Title indexing definition with one that goes directly to
the MARC and excludes the fields you don't want. That would be more
involved, though. See here for the current mapping used:
http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-mapping.html#relateditem
HTH,
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Donald Butterworth
don.butterwo...@asburyseminary.edu wrote:
Colleagues,
We recently upgraded to the 2.5.2 release and, as a cataloger, I was
ecstatic to find that Browse the Catalog is now available. I will use
this
feature extensively when assigning author names, series, and subjects.
The author and title indexes looks great, but there is one tweak in the
subject index and one in series that I want to make.
In subjects each individual subject subfield is being indexed rather than
the whole line. For example:
650 0 Conflict management -- Religious aspects -- Christianity
is being displayed in the results list as
* Conflict management
* Religious aspects
* Christianity
What do I need to do to change this?
In series I don't want the subfield v to be included in the results
list
display. For example:
Tyndale studies ; v. 1 (1)
Tyndale studies ; v. 2 (1)
Tyndale studies ; v. 3 (1)
should display as
Tyndale studies ; (3)
Again, what do we need to do to change this?
Thanks for you insights!
Don
--
Don Butterworth
Faculty Associate / Librarian III
B.L. Fisher Library
Asbury Theological Seminary
don.butterwo...@asburyseminary.edu
(859) 858-2227
--
Mike Rylander
| Director of Research and Development
| 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
--
Don Butterworth
Faculty Associate / Librarian III
B.L. Fisher Library
Asbury Theological Seminary
don.butterwo...@asburyseminary.edu
(859) 858-2227
