https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=19893 --- Comment #97 from David Gustafsson <glasklas@gmail.com> --- (In reply to David Gustafsson from comment #95)
(In reply to Ere Maijala from comment #91)
If the fields don't belong together, you can always define them alone as is currently done in many cases. It's just that you should also be able to say that you want 245ab as a whole.
Sure, I can buy that. But that is not the way the mappings are currently defined in most places. For example Personal-name is mapped to "100abcdefghjklmnopqrstvxyz" and would have to be split up into one mapping for each subfield, like 100a, 100b, 100c, 100d etc, or all the information will be join into a string that does not make much sense. This will make search behavior harder to predict, potentially cause unexpected exact/proximity matches and thus more difficult to optimize.
I just realized that splitting up the fields would not make any difference with the Koha-specific implementation, it makes no distinction if subfield mappings are defined together in one mapping or separately. I would guess that it would be much more efficient to introduce concaternation as an exception, with special syntax (as there appears to be only a few mappings that have use for it), and keep default behavior as it is. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.