http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=10421 --- Comment #13 from David Cook <dcook@prosentient.com.au> --- (In reply to David Cook from comment #12)
Mohammad Nashbat's comment on the listserv is also interesting:
"I’m trying to upload a deletion batch from ebrary to our Koha LMS, this batch changes the records status in the leader tag to “d” delete, which used to delete the bib records using our old library system “Dynix” after indexing. But now in Koha it do change the status but without deleting the bib records even after indexing, am I missing something?"
I think at a bare minimum records with a "d" need to be suppressed in the OPAC.
However, actual deletions...I'm not sure what I think of this "batch deletion" idea. I haven't done a lot yet with MARC dumps from vendors like EBSCO, but I could see how re-uploading records with a "d" in the leader to do a batch delete might be an idea.
While it's only tangentially related to this discussion, I wonder what sorts of best practices people have for maintaining MARC records in Koha that come from electronic service providers (for services like electronic journals and e-books).
We have a homecooked solution here that my boss takes care of but I wonder what the optimal way of doing it would be.
I'm sure people in a union catalogue situation/those who use OCLC or other interconnected cataloguing tools must also encounter situations where the original record has changed and now they either need to update or delete their existing records.
(I know this is a problem I've also encountered in developing the OAI-PMH harvester. It seems like it could be a pervasive issue.)
Jared Camins-Esakov has mentioned that using the import/revert features in Koha, a person could revert a batch of MARC records from an electronic subscription, then just import the latest full reload file. That seems to me to be a very reasonable solution. The only problem would be if someone added items to those records, but as he pointed out...with a large enough load (say 50k records), the likelihood of items being added is probably fairly low. That said, I think some of our libraries have items automatically added to some of their electronic holdings. However, perhaps that's a practice that should just be eliminated, since the process Jared describes seems quite robust. In the case where you unsubscribe from a subscription, you'd just revert your records and that's that. So long as you have a full MARC record dump, you're covered for additions/updates/deletes. -- In the union catalog/online cataloging tool scenario, additions/updates shouldn't be much of a problem (provided that there haven't been local changes), but I imagine that deletes are still an issue...and that perhaps you would still want a record marked "d" in your catalogue (although not in your OPAC). Ok. That's it from me. Sorry for spamming all of you! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.