http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=10662 --- Comment #59 from David Cook <dcook@prosentient.com.au> --- (In reply to Viktor Sarge from comment #57)
It should be trivial to merge the 001 and 003 together to form a 035 like "(OCoLC)814782" (http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd035.html). That would certainly help eliminate that risk of "false matching" mentioned above.
However, in the LIBRIS data that I've seen, I haven't seen any examples of a 003.
Interesting. I've actually perceived it the other way around - that Libris is actually quite good at sticking "SE-LIBR" into 003 of all their records.
(A quick example http://libris.kb.se/bib/14862617?vw=full&tab3=marc)
That's very interesting, Viktor! When I look at http://libris.kb.se/bib/219553?vw=full&tab3=marc, I see a 003. However, when I look at http://data.libris.kb.se/bib/oaipmh?verb=GetRecord&metadataPrefix=marcxml&identifier=http://libris.kb.se/resource/bib/219553, I do not see a 003. There are a fair number of other discrepancies between the catalogue and the OAI-PMH server (which is password protected) it seems. I think the OAI-PMH server is still in beta, so perhaps that's the explanation? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.