Some records in the example result set do not have a main author
entry,
therefore, there is no author entry link for those records in the brief result set list. The brief records should include links to added entry authors in addition to main entry authors.
is subject to strenuous debate and I, for one, would argue against this approach. I think the difference between main entry author and added entry author, for those who catalog using rules that include this concept, is very important. Where there's no main author entry, I think the display of the result set should reflect that fact. Spencer, I'm curious if you're coming at this from a cataloger's
----- "Spencer Anspach" <sanspach@gmail.com> wrote: perspective, or from a user's. One thing I've often noticed, is that the average user often would view a corporate name (like 'Time Life Books') as a series, not an author, and I've been asked by some users to put Corporate Name entries (110$a) down in series listings ... I've not seen many cases of Meeting Name entries (field 111 in MARC) so don't have much of an intuition on those. As far as main vs. added entries, I think again, that's all in who the audience is. I've had plenty of users express confusion over the difference. What I have noticed, is that professionally trained catalogers view the bibliographic universe in vastly, and often incompatible ways, from the average library user. While the distinctions that catalogers make are essential for accurately recording materials, they aren't always the best as a resource for finding what the user wants. So I guess the questions is, how can we build a search tool that satisfies both worldviews :-) Cheers, -- Joshua Ferraro SUPPORT FOR OPEN-SOURCE SOFTWARE President, Technology migration, training, maintenance, support LibLime Featuring Koha Open-Source ILS jmf@liblime.com |Full Demos at http://liblime.com/koha |1(888)KohaILS