-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
dct:title of bibo:Journal not generated correctly for RDA records #762
Comments
The relevant part of the current morph currently only take into account 310, 331 and 333 for generating dct:title and work something like this:
I see different possibilities for solving this issue:
Probably 2.b) would be the easiest solution but it would mean that the title for bibo:Journals are generated differently pre- and post-RDA. What do you think, @dr0i? |
Our colleague Stephani pointed to the fact that the information to be concatenated to 331 in RDA records should be taken from |
As both your examples have also
Or do we need the more detailed subfields differentiating |
Having looked at the data again, using <datafield tag="085" ind1="x" ind2="1">
<subfield code="l">K</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="085" ind1="x" ind2="1">
<subfield code="l">VIII</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="085" ind1="x" ind2="1">
<subfield code="l">1</subfield>
<subfield code="a">Einrichtungen für ältere Menschen in Bayern ... und ambulant betreute Wohngemeinschaften in Bayern ...</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="331" ind1="-" ind2="1">
<subfield code="a">Statistische Berichte</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="360" ind1="-" ind2="1">
<subfield code="a">K</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="360" ind1="-" ind2="1">
<subfield code="a">VIII</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="360" ind1="-" ind2="1">
<subfield code="a">1, Einrichtungen für ältere Menschen in Bayern ... und ambulant betreute Wohngemeinschaften in Bayern ...</subfield>
</datafield> Generating the title from Thus, we will do it as I said in #762 (comment), 2. a) using only subfield |
See #762. - fix also a redundant title entry, see BT000003404 - add HT018785916 to the test set - update tests
See #762. - fix also a redundant title entry, see BT000003404 - add HT018785916 to the test set - update tests
Deployed to staging. |
Removed the |
+1 |
Deployed to production, closing. |
This is a sub-issue of hbz/lobid#161. |
[Edit: Reported by edoweb customers on 2015-12-02.]
See e.g. http://lobid.org/resource/HT016320444 (pre-RDA record) vs. http://lobid.org/resource/HT018819975 (RDA record).
Frrom the source of HT016320444:
As you can see, the field 310 contains information that is already present in 331 and fields 085. I guess, witht he switch to RDA they decided to get rid of this redundancy (which is a good thing, I think).
In the relevant parts of the RDA record's source (HT018819975) 310 is missing:
Somehow we will have to generate a correct
dct:title
both for pre-RDA and for RDA journal recordsThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: