[Koha-bugs] [Bug 32726] Authority search result display and relator terms in 22.05

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

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=32726

Shi Yao Wang <shi-yao.wang at inLibro.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |shi-yao.wang at inLibro.com

--- Comment #8 from Shi Yao Wang <shi-yao.wang at inLibro.com> ---
(In reply to Phil Ringnalda from comment #7)
> No, with more context authorize.heading doesn't contain $e, because in
> 
>             $subfields_to_report =
> $handler->get_auth_heading_subfields_to_report($tag);
> 
>             if ($subfields_to_report) {
>                 push @authorized, {
>                     heading => $field->as_string($subfields_to_report),
>                     hemain  => ( $field->subfield(
> substr($subfields_to_report, 0, 1) ) // undef ),
>                     field   => $tag,
>                 };
>             } else {
>                 push @authorized, {
>                     heading => $field->as_string(),
>                     hemain  => ( $field->subfield( 'a' ) // undef ),
>                     field   => $tag,
>                 };
>             }
> 
> $subfields_to_report will be true for 100/110/111 and will not include the
> relator subfield (which is $e for 100/110, but $j for 111), because it is
> not what people tend to think it is. In an authority record, the relator
> describes the relationship between the name and the work in a name-title
> heading, like "$aBlum, Leon,$d1872-1950,$edefendant$tLeon Blum devant la
> Cour supreme, Riom.$lHebrew" as explained in
> https://www.loc.gov/marc/authority/adx00.html
> 
> Having a 100/110 with a $e but no $t or a 111 with a $j but no $t is wrong.
> That doesn't necessarily mean that Koha shouldn't show it (particularly
> because it autocreated authority records that way for years), but not with
> this patch: blindly adding $e to every heading whether it's defined as
> relator, defined as something other than relator (it's a repeatable
> "subordinate unit" subfield for meeting names), or undefined, is not the
> right solution.


What would be an ideal solution for this bug?

Only add the relator $e for 100/110 and $j for 111?
Are there more relator fields other than those?
Is hardcoding for every possible relator a good solution? (I would think it's
not)

I'm not familiar enough with marc. Suggestions?

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