[Koha-bugs] [Bug 14567] Browse interface for OPAC

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.koha-community.org]

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=14567

--- Comment #8 from Robin Sheat <robin at catalyst.net.nz> ---
(In reply to Heather from comment #7)
> I tried it out here: http://browse.koha.catalystdemo.net.nz
> It seems nice, but it doesn't seem like a true browse to me--what I look for
> in a browse is to enter a search term, and have the results returned to be
> what is exactly before my searched term in the given index, then where the
> searched term is/would be, then what is exactly after the searched term in
> the index.  So there would be no need for "exact, fuzzy, really fuzzy,"
> because when I browse an index, I want the results to be what is before and
> after that term in the given index.

There are technical reasons why this is particularly hard, essentially that
pulling the index terms out in order is not something that can readily be done
without patching Elasticsearch itself, which I'm considering out of scope of
this project :)

However, when I thought about it with that in mind, I got to wondering what the
point of a complete alphabetical index really is to a library user. There's no
semantic relationship between a word that starts with R and a word that starts
with S, why would it be meaningful to put one beside the other. A subject of
"Symbols" is not closely related to a subject of "Tarantulas", just because
they're alphabetically close. However, an author name of "Stephen" is (sorta)
semantically related to an author name of "Steven", if the user hasn't quite
remembered the whole name or the spelling.

> That said, when I searched "exact" for "Author": Rowling
> I get:
> Rowling, J. K.
> Rowling, J.K.

This is a GIGO situation with the data that is the result of it not being
terribly cleanly catalogued in the first place. I tend to prefer working with
data like this as it is better at highlighting odd edge cases.

I've been thinking about ways to correct for cases like this (where it's just a
punctuation or whitespace difference), but it presents some issues relating to
how it'd be done reliably with no false positives. So I've postponed further
thinking about it for now. In an ideal world, everyone will be using
authorities anyway, and this won't happen :)

> This is nice, but, again, it doesn't seem like a "browse" to me--these are
> just search results.  When I click the names, I get the exact same search
> results as I do via Advanced Search, Author Phrase:

It is doing pretty much the same thing as a search, yes. Essentially, it's goal
is to be an easier way to look for some specific things, possibly when you're a
bit unsure about the details. I think that subjects will benefit from this the
most actually, as scrolling through
"Birds -- Kakapo", "Birds -- Kea", "Birds -- Kiwi" is something that has real
use. Additionally, a search for "Kiwi" will also find "Birds -- Kiwi" (though
this behaviour isn't visible in the data that's currently on the test site due
to the way it's catalogued.)

> If I Browse via "Fuzzy" with: Rowling
> I get these results:
> Rollins, Henry,
> Rowland, Sarah-Jane.
> Rowlands, David.
> Rowlands, Gena.
> Rowling, J. K.
> Rowling, J.K.
> 
> Which does show me some results which should be in the author index above
> Rowling, but I get no results that should be in the author index after
> Rowling.  "Really fuzzy" is the same.

I'll double check this, but it's most likely that in this database, there's
just nothing further that matches. Actually, in this case, fuzzy and extra
fuzzy will be doing the same thing as there's a max edit distance limit for the
fuzziness, and I think it will have been hit. I'm probably going to remove the
"extra fuzzy" option anyway, it risks being more confusing than anything.

> I would like to see the searched for term in the middle of hits that occur
> before and after it in the index, e.g. something like this (an author
> "Browse" result, with made up examples below Rowling, J.K.):

But why? What does an alphabetically adjacent author tell you about that set of
authors, and what does it provide that a library user would find useful?
(Technical reasons for why this is hard aside.)

> I hope this is helpful!  --h2

Thanks for checking it out!

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.