https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 Magnus Enger <magnus@libriotech.no> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |magnus@libriotech.no -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 --- Comment #2 from Janusz Kaczmarek <januszop@gmail.com> --- Yes, I agree, definitely. The (relatively) new $1 should be used for identifying Real Would Objects. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 Paul Poulain <paul.poulain@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |paul.poulain@biblibre.com --- Comment #3 from Paul Poulain <paul.poulain@biblibre.com> --- One of our libraries is interested by this feature, they asked me to have a look at this ticket. Some explanations (from history) : I'm the developer who wrote the MARC management in Koha (in 2003...) The $9 was chosen to store a link between biblio & authority because it was for local use (as any field/subfield with a 9). In UNIMARC, the $3 was a possible field (as it contains the linkage), in MARC21 there was no subfield for that. But anyway, I thought (and still think) it was better to keep the $3 as it is and use a local field because it stores a local information (the authid of the authority in the local [Koha] system) In France, the SUDOC (national academic catalogue) makes an extensive usage of the $3, we must preserve it. Otherwise : That's a very good idea to add the wikidata reference (or any other one) and your specification seems OK, I have a couple of comment though: - switch the feature on/off => not sure it's needed, if the next syspref is empty, it's OFF ;) - source of the standard IDs (possibly different for different biblio fields?) (standard in MARC 21 authority: 024, but may be also 010/035) (a list) => I agree, it must not be at a global level. But counter-proposal : define that in the authority level. In the authority definition, we define which authority field must be copied in the biblio field [for example, corporate name is copied from the 110 of the authority]. Shouldn't we have another option to say "024$a" is copied in the $1 of the biblio ? [the $1 is possible for UNIMARC, it's an unused field] - how many ids should be copied (= how may $0 added): only the first found or all of them => I would say "copy only one". Of maybe add another option in the authority definition to say "add the 1st where source/$2=[_____]" [$2 is valid for UNIMARC too] - if an extra link/icon should be generated in display (OPAC / librarian) => I think we just need to improve the XSLT for that. Very interesting proposal though ! I'll continue talking with the library to see if they can sponsor the dev -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 --- Comment #4 from Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl> --- Thinking along these lines about it: Data looks like 024 7# - OTHER STANDARD IDENTIFIER Standard number or code: https://id.rijksmuseum.nl/31018715 Source of number or code: uri 024 7# - OTHER STANDARD IDENTIFIER Real World Object URI: https://rkd.nl/explore/artists/15189 Source of number or code: rkda 024 7# - OTHER STANDARD IDENTIFIER Real World Object URI: http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q454568 Source of number or code: wikidata Add a pref to know which field numbers to copy (024 for MARC21). Copy $1 from auth to $1 at biblio side. (Repeatable) Leave #2 alone. It is something different. In the above case we need to decide on the best way to show all (3) additional URIs on the detail page that come with this author (or another auth type). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 --- Comment #5 from Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer@bsz-bw.de> --- For MARC21 I think identifiers for $0 are often found in 001/035: https://www.loc.gov/marc/authority/ad035.html -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 --- Comment #7 from Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer@bsz-bw.de> --- (In reply to bruno.forment@orpheusinstituut.be from comment #6)

(In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #5)

...

For MARC21 I think identifiers for $0 are often found in 001/035: https://www.loc.gov/marc/authority/ad035.html

Those identifiers work only on the level of the complete record, not with respect to the various authorities (personal, geographic, topical terms etc.).

Hi Brono, I meant the 035 in authorities, not 035 in the bibliographic record. In our case for example one of the 035 of the authority has the ID from the national authority database for this person/subject/topical term. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 --- Comment #9 from Julian Maurice <julian.maurice@biblibre.com> --- Created attachment 155891 --> https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=155891&action=edit Bug 22972: Modify MARC21 XSLT to include link to external data ($1) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 Julian Maurice <julian.maurice@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |Needs Signoff CC| |julian.maurice@biblibre.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 --- Comment #11 from Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl> --- Hi Julian, How does this work together with pref AuthorityMergeMode ? If you are in strict mode, the merge is overwriting or removing subfields. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 --- Comment #13 from Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl> --- (In reply to Julian Maurice from comment #12)

Data is not copied to the biblio field while merging authorities. I haven't tested but I suppose that if you are in strict mode, the biblio field's $1 is removed.

Yes, thats my point. It would be a temporary enrichment. But note that 99% is on loose mode luckily. (Checked HEA numbers.) Should this be noted somewhere? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 Thibault Keromnès <thibault.keromnes@univ-paris8.fr> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |thibault.keromnes@univ-pari | |s8.fr Status|Needs Signoff |Patch doesn't apply --- Comment #15 from Thibault Keromnès <thibault.keromnes@univ-paris8.fr> --- Patch doesn't patch apply : CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in koha-tmpl/intranet-tmpl/prog/en/modules/admin/authtypes.tt -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 Baptiste Wojtkowski (bwoj) <baptiste.wojtkowski@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Patch doesn't apply |Needs Signoff -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 --- Comment #17 from Baptiste Wojtkowski (bwoj) <baptiste.wojtkowski@biblibre.com> --- Created attachment 170444 --> https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=170444&action=edit Bug 22972: Modify MARC21 XSLT to include link to external data ($1) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 Baptiste Wojtkowski (bwoj) <baptiste.wojtkowski@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |baptiste.wojtkowski@biblibr | |e.com --- Comment #19 from Baptiste Wojtkowski (bwoj) <baptiste.wojtkowski@biblibre.com> --- Rebased on main -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 Janusz Kaczmarek <januszop@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Needs Signoff |Failed QA --- Comment #21 from Janusz Kaczmarek <januszop@gmail.com> --- Thank you, Baptiste, for supplying this patch. We tested it: it works fine for adding $1 (or any other subfield indicated in configuration) in the standard editor. What doesn't work: 1. [advanced editor] In the advanced editor, if a authority record has more than one 024 field, all occurrences of the indicated subfield are concatenated into a single string and placed in a single $1 subfield. 2. [update/merge] Adding the 024 field with the subfield indicated in the configuration to the authority record does not add subfield $1 to the heading field in bibliographic records linked with the authority record in question. 3. [link] In a situation where authority and bibliographic records have been loaded into the system from an external source, and then the linking process has been started (link_bibs_to_authorities.pl), the 024 $1 subfields (or other subfields indicated in the configuration, respectively) are not added as $1 subfields in the corresponding headings of the bibliographic records. There is also the question of how Koha should behave in the case of authority records with the 024 $1 subfields already present in the database and linked to bibliographic records - wouldn't we need a script to rewrite the headings and add the $1 subfields. And a final note: displaying information from the subfield $1 in the bibliographic record view seems very unergonomic to us, especially for URIs outside the list hardcoded in the XSLT (currently: viaf and wikidata), such as ISNI. We would suggest integrating this information into the functionality introduced by bug 29948, as a possible follow-up. Would you be ready to work further on 1, 2, 3? And what do you think about final remarks... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 --- Comment #23 from Julian Maurice <julian.maurice@biblibre.com> --- (In reply to Janusz Kaczmarek from comment #21)

1. [advanced editor] In the advanced editor, if a authority record has more than one 024 field, all occurrences of the indicated subfield are concatenated into a single string and placed in a single $1 subfield. It looks like a bug in the advanced editor. I reproduce it on main branch with other subfields.

2. [update/merge] Adding the 024 field with the subfield indicated in the configuration to the authority record does not add subfield $1 to the heading field in bibliographic records linked with the authority record in question. Confirmed. I'll send a fix

3. [link] In a situation where authority and bibliographic records have been loaded into the system from an external source, and then the linking process has been started (link_bibs_to_authorities.pl), the 024 $1 subfields (or other subfields indicated in the configuration, respectively) are not added as $1 subfields in the corresponding headings of the bibliographic records. I'm not familiar with the linker, but it looks like it does not even try to update the biblio field (except adding a $9 subfield of course). So I think this should not be changed in the context of this bug.

There is also the question of how Koha should behave in the case of authority records with the 024 $1 subfields already present in the database and linked to bibliographic records - wouldn't we need a script to rewrite the headings and add the $1 subfields. I think that misc/maintenance/update_authorities.pl may help. For instance: misc/maintenance/update_authorities.pl -merge -reference $authid -c But that requires calling it for each authority

And a final note: displaying information from the subfield $1 in the bibliographic record view seems very unergonomic to us, especially for URIs outside the list hardcoded in the XSLT (currently: viaf and wikidata), such as ISNI. We would suggest integrating this information into the functionality introduced by bug 29948, as a possible follow-up.

I'll look into it -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 Julian Maurice <julian.maurice@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Failed QA |Needs Signoff -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 Mark Hofstetter <mark@hofstetter.at> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mark@hofstetter.at -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22972 --- Comment #25 from Fridolin Somers <fridolin.somers@biblibre.com> --- Needs tidy right ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.