[Koha-devel] Proposed "metadata" table for Koha

[David Cook]

Hi all:

 

For those not following along at
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=10662, we’ve
recently started talking about the possibility of adding a “metadata” table
to Koha.

 

The basic schema I have in mind would be something like: metadata.id,
metadata.record_id, metadata.scheme, metadata.qualifier, metadata.value.

 

The row would look like: 1, 1, marc21, 001, 123456789

 

It might also be necessary to store “metadata.record_type” so as to know
where metadata.record_id points. This obviously has a lot of disadvantages

redundant data between “metadata” rows, no database cascades via foreign
keys, etc. However, it might be necessary in the short-term as a temporary
measure.

 

Of course, adding “yet another place” to store metadata might not seem like
a great idea. We already store metadata in biblioitems.marcxml (and
biblioitems.marc), Zebra, and other biblio/biblioitems/items relational
database fields. Do we really need a new place to worry about data?

That said, if we’re ever going to move away from MARC as the internal
metadata format, we need to start transitioning to something new. I’ve
noticed this “metadata” table model in DSpace and other library systems, and
it seems to work reasonable well. 

 

I don’t know if we’d break down the whole record into this structure, or if
we’d just break down certain fields as defined by a configuration file. In
the short term, I’d like to use something like this to access a record’s 001
without going to Zebra, which can be slow to update. I need to be able to
query a record using the 001 as soon as its added to the database, and I
can’t necessarily get that from Zebra. I also need to be able to query a
record, even if Zebra is down.

 

Failing the “metadata” table idea, I’m not sure how else we’d expose the 001
and any number of other fields without using Zebra. We store the 020 and 022
in biblioitems.isbn and biblioitems.issn, but we’re putting multiple values
in a single field, and that’s not so great for searching. We might also want
to add the 035 to the fields we’re searching, so I don’t think just adding
to the biblio or biblioitems tables will really do
 especially since we’re
trying to move away from MARC.

 

Anyway, please let me know your thoughts. 

 

 

David Cook

Systems Librarian

Prosentient Systems

72/330 Wattle St, Ultimo, NSW 2007

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.koha-community.org/pipermail/koha-devel/attachments/20151130/b37b44c7/attachment.html>