[Koha-bugs] [Bug 14198] RDA: Indexing 264 field (Zebra)

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

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=14198

--- Comment #7 from Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer at bsz-bw.de> ---
Hi Hector,

> I filed a new bug
> <http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=14304> for XSLTs
> in OPAC and Intranet to show the link for Publisher like 260 field. I will
> correct the link for the OPAC there.

Thx! Sorry for causing you more work. :(

> Just one comment on etc/zebradb/biblios/etc/bib1.att
> @@ +220,4 @@
> >  att 9010    cn-suffix
> >  att 9011    Suppress
> >  att 9012    Identifier-other
> > +#att 9013    arp
> This is an index that really exist in the bottom of the file, I put it there
> in a commented line because it tends to confuse, this was eliminated from
> the new patch.

Ah, that makes sense - I didn't spot that from the patch file.

One more thought looking at this a bit more awake: Currently the new and the
old indexes look as they will be mostly identical - they both index 260 and
264. I see the note about the Provider index being based on a suggestion from
LOC, so that makes sense to me. But do we really need the other 2 new indexes
Provider-place and Provider-date? Should we make them different or maybe just
map them as an alias in ccl.properties to the existing indexes?

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