[Evergreen-catalogers] MODS indexing and 700 |t

[Mary Llewellyn]

I agree. Nothing upsets our libraries more than getting a record near the
top of the search results when they can't figure out why. Main entry authors
should carry more weight than authors from contents notes and added entries.


-----Original Message-----
From: evergreen-catalogers-bounces at list.evergreen-ils.org
[mailto:evergreen-catalogers-bounces at list.evergreen-ils.org] On Behalf Of
Elizabeth B. Thomsen
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 12:16 PM
To: evergreen-catalogers at list.evergreen-ils.org
Subject: Re: [Evergreen-catalogers] MODS indexing and 700 |t

Galen asks:

> [1] Would it be a good idea to make this part of the default index
definitions?  I lean towards yes, but if so, I think it should go
hand-in-hand making sure that 7xx with $t are included in the default bib
details display in the OPAC.

Yes.

> [2] Should it be possible to give names coming from relatedItems a
different weight for the purposes of relevance ranking?  If the answer is
yes, that implies that those names would go into separate name indexes
rather than being added to the existing ones.

I am less sure about this one, but I would say yes on the grounds that
although an author is an author, entries from analytics perhaps should have
less weight because a book entirely by Charles Dickens is more relevant than
an anthology in which he wrote one story out of many.

--
Elizabeth Thomsen, Member Services Manager
NOBLE: North of Boston Library Exchange
26 Cherry Hill Drive
Danvers MA 01923
E-mail: et at noblenet.org

_______________________________________________
Evergreen-catalogers mailing list
Evergreen-catalogers at list.evergreen-ils.org
http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-catalogers