[Koha-devel] Koha-devel Digest, Vol 96, Issue 11

Fri Nov 8 12:35:48 CET 2013

Il 08/11/2013 12:00, koha-devel-request at lists.koha-community.org ha scritto:
> Send Koha-devel mailing list submissions to
> 	koha-devel at lists.koha-community.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	koha-devel-request at lists.koha-community.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	koha-devel-owner at lists.koha-community.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Koha-devel digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Please help: biblio and biblionumber (Andrea Furin)
>    2. Re: Please help: biblio and biblionumber (Bob Birchall)
>    3. Unimarc an standard place for biblio and biblionumber
>       (Zeno Tajoli)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 00:01:38 +0100
> From: Andrea Furin <andrea.furin at slacky.it>
> To: Koha-devel at lists.koha-community.org
> Subject: [Koha-devel] Please help: biblio and biblionumber
> Message-ID: <527C1BD2.2020101 at slacky.it>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> hi. I had a very big problem: I cannot solve this:
> in "MARC bibliographic framework test" I have an error:
> "biblio and biblionumber 	The biblio.biblionumber and
> biblioitems.biblioitemnumber fields be mapped to a MARC subfield"
>
> Installed Koha 3.12.6 via deb.
>
> I use Unimarc.
>
> My records.abs tells:
> ############ IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS ##################
> melm 001        Local-number,Local-number:n
> # Local-number (biblionumber can be either in 090$9 or, on some setup,
> on 001)
> melm 009      Identifier-standard:w,Identifier-standard:n
> melm 090$a      Local-number,Local-number:n
> melm 099$c
> date-entered-on-file:s,date-entered-on-file:n,date-entered-on-file:y,Date-of-acquisition,Date-of-acquisition:d,Dat$
> melm 099$d
> Date/time-last-modified:s,Date/time-last-modified:n,Date/time-last-modified:y
> melm 099$t      ccode:w
>
> My framework:
> biblio.biblionumber -> 001_@
> bilioitems.biblioitemnumber -> 090_a
>
>
> Please help, thanks in advance
>
> a.f.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 11:00:43 +1100
> From: Bob Birchall <bob at calyx.net.au>
> To: koha-devel at lists.koha-community.org
> Subject: Re: [Koha-devel] Please help: biblio and biblionumber
> Message-ID: <527C29AB.4090707 at calyx.net.au>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hi Andrea,
> Its better etiquette to post to only one list.  Choose the most 
> appropriate.  In this case, its not really a development question, so 
> the general list is probably best.
>
> biblionumber and biblioitemnumber are internal Koha numbers.  Field 001 
> (in MARC21 and I am assuming in UNIMARC) is a control number that you 
> can assign.  A standard Koha install will use 999$c for biblionumber and 
> 999$d for biblioitemnumber.  You can check these settings at 
> Administration/Koha To Marc Mapping.  There is generally no need to 
> change these, and its probably not a good idea.
>
> Did you make any changes of that nature?
>
> I hope this helps,
> Bob
>
> On 08/11/13 10:01, Andrea Furin wrote:
>> hi. I had a very big problem: I cannot solve this:
>> in "MARC bibliographic framework test" I have an error:
>> "biblio and biblionumber 	The biblio.biblionumber and
>> biblioitems.biblioitemnumber fields be mapped to a MARC subfield"
>>
>> Installed Koha 3.12.6 via deb.
>>
>> I use Unimarc.
>>
>> My records.abs tells:
>> ############ IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS ##################
>> melm 001        Local-number,Local-number:n
>> # Local-number (biblionumber can be either in 090$9 or, on some setup,
>> on 001)
>> melm 009      Identifier-standard:w,Identifier-standard:n
>> melm 090$a      Local-number,Local-number:n
>> melm 099$c
>> date-entered-on-file:s,date-entered-on-file:n,date-entered-on-file:y,Date-of-acquisition,Date-of-acquisition:d,Dat$
>> melm 099$d
>> Date/time-last-modified:s,Date/time-last-modified:n,Date/time-last-modified:y
>> melm 099$t      ccode:w
>>
>> My framework:
>> biblio.biblionumber -> 001_@
>> bilioitems.biblioitemnumber -> 090_a
>>
>>
>> Please help, thanks in advance
>>
>> a.f.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Koha-devel mailing list
>> Koha-devel at lists.koha-community.org
>> http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
>> website : http://www.koha-community.org/
>> git : http://git.koha-community.org/
>> bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 11:34:33 +0100
> From: Zeno Tajoli <z.tajoli at cineca.it>
> To: koha-devel at lists.koha-community.org
> Subject: [Koha-devel] Unimarc an standard place for biblio and
> 	biblionumber
> Message-ID: <527CBE39.40600 at cineca.it>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hi to all,
>
> stanrting from question of Andrea Furin, I do a check on unimarc setups.
>
> In en, fr-FR, it-IT the mysql field biblio.biblionumber is connecect 
> with 001.
>
>  > in "MARC bibliographic framework test" I have an error:
>> "biblio and biblionumber 	The biblio.biblionumber and
>> biblioitems.biblioitemnumber fields be mapped to a MARC subfield"
> but with this setup the cgi /admin/checkmarc.pl gives this error.
>
> So, it is better to change checkmarc.pl on insert a new default ?
>
> In Unimarc xsl for biblionumber it used 090$a
>
> Bye
> Zeno Tajoli

I've found this:

http://kpro.tamil.fr                                   
biblio.biblionumber                     090_9       Constraints:
subfield ignored

biblioitems.biblioitemnumber    090_a       Constraints: subfield ignored
http://intranet-demo.biblibre.com/        biblio.biblionumber        
             001_@     Constraints: subfield ignored

biblioitems.biblioitemnumber    090_a        Constraints: subfield ignored

If I keep "Constraints: subfield ignored" all is ok for me too: it this
the solution?