[Koha-bugs] [Bug 28491] Field 003 in authority records not updated after import

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.koha-community.org]

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=28491

--- Comment #28 from Heather <heather_hernandez at nps.gov> ---
IMO, there really is no way to "misuse" an 035 field--a number in the 035 field
is simply a number that is not the current/valid system control number, but is
a number to be retained.  (Retaining control numbers being a very good idea,
IMO!)  Putting a number that is valid in all the other systems and catalogs in
the universe except for the one that the record is in right now is a perfectly
valid and IMO very good use of the 035.  035s sure can mean, "I'm personally
not currently using this number in 001."

Also, IMO, there is no way to accurately trace source(s) of records. Records
flow through systems, they are shared--that is really the point of cataloging
according to standards, so the records can be shared.  IMO.:)

Figuring out which human or process imported a record into a catalog (the
source of a record) works great for bibs in Koha--I can take a look a bib in
the Advanced Bibliographic Editor and see in the information in the 945 field. 
(e.g., "Connexion Client User"--that's me!)  And there are logs.

If there were an Advanced Authority Editor I would probably be able to see the
source of any authority record in a 945 field, but that's another
bug/development...:)

The MARC21 standard for authority records is that 001/003 work in tandem.  It
works great for bibs.  IMO it should work the same for auts.  The source of a
bib in Koha is in the locally-defined 945 and works great; it should be the
same for auts (and maybe it is?).  If libraries are using the 003 for a source
of a record, that is OK *if* it is functionally paired with the record number
in the 001, but IMO is duplicating information that *should* be present in a
945 (that should be visible.)  (Maybe there is a way to make a 945 visible in
an aut record framework, but I don't see any authority record framework in the
MARC frameworks, but, again, probably another bug!)

I wish this had gone ahead as was signed off in 2021:  if a library wants a
different number in the 001 then the replaced number in the 001 and the
therefore obsolute org code in the 003 is mapped to a $z in the 035, e.g., $z
(ReplacedOrgCode)ReplacedNumber And the source of the record could be, as in
bibs, in a locally-defined 945 field to serve the functionality for libraries
who need the source of the record tracked in the record as is done in bibs.

--h2, who always has *some* sort of cataloging-informed opinion!:)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
You are the assignee for the bug.