[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index

Wed Jun 18 14:26:56 EDT 2014

Hi Janet,

> I apologize if I'm misunderstanding this. Will the separators cause the subject in the browse list to behave the same way the headings do in our bib record display? I think subject headings in browse and in the bib record should be treated as a complete entity, not as separate topics. I looked at Bibliomation's index and if I click on "United States History Civil War, 1861-1865 Women" I get the 55 entries which is the number in parentheses after that link.
My understanding is that the separators will just affect the display of 
the subject heading, not the link behavior.

Kathy

Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
klussier at masslnc.org
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier

On 6/18/2014 2:10 PM, Janet Schrader wrote:
> I apologize if I'm misunderstanding this. Will the separators cause the subject in the browse list to behave the same way the headings do in our bib record display? I think subject headings in browse and in the bib record should be treated as a complete entity, not as separate topics. I looked at Bibliomation's index and if I click on "United States History Civil War, 1861-1865 Women" I get the 55 entries which is the number in parentheses after that link.
>
> Currently in our bib record displays the subject headings have separators. So the subject heading looks like this:
> United States>History>Civil War, 1861-1865>Women.
> If I click on 'United States' the search is for just that part of the subject. If I click on 'History' the search is for 'United States>History'. If I want to search women in the Civil War I have to click on 'Women' to search the entire subject phrase.
>
> The unfortunate scenario here is that clicking on the beginning of the subject phrase searches only 'United States' and the search times out so a patron gets "sorry no entries were found for 'United States'". Which separate term clicked on determines what gets searched. It is not very intuitive to know that you have to *start at the end* to make the search more specific.
>
>
>
> Janet
>
> Janet Schrader
> C/W MARS Inc.
> Supervisor of Bibliographic Services
> 67 Millbrook Street, Suite 201
> Worcester, MA 01606
> tel: 508-755-3323 ext. 25
> fax: 508-757-7801
> jschrader at cwmars.org
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Mike Rylander
> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 1:13 PM
> To: Evergreen Discussion Group
> Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.5.2 Subject Browse Index
>
> Kathy and Don,
>
> To the separator issue, those can certainly be added, but not without adjusting the search-oriented All Subjects index.  You'd need to (at
> least) set the joiner field to ' -- ' (note the spaces!), add a browse_xpath of '//*', and to set browse_field=TRUE.  Then a reingest.
> If testing that, I'd suggest picking a few records to try it with first, of course.
>
> This will be create entries for the full subject heading in addition to the separated ones from the topic, name, etc subject indexes.  My previously mentioned method would be more "cataloging" correct.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Kathy Lussier <klussier at masslnc.org> wrote:
>> Hi Don,
>>
>> I think there is another way you can get the catalog to display the
>> entire string. When MassLNC was testing this development with
>> Bibliomation, we noticed the same issue and were advised to set the
>> "All Subjects" index browse field to true to get the entire string to
>> display in the browse search. By default, the browse flag is set to
>> false in this index, and the subject browse is based on the
>> geographic, name, topic, time period subject indexes.
>>
>> If you look at Bibliomation's catalog at http://acorn.biblio.org/,
>> you'll see that the browse search is displaying the complete subject
>> string (minus separators). I was just talking to Ben Shum about their
>> setup, and they do not have authority records loaded in their system
>> yet, but they were able to get the entire string to display by
>> enabling browse in the All Subjects index.
>>
>> What I don't know is if a reingest is required after you set the
>> browse flag to true for an existing index in your system. Could anyone
>> answer that question?
>>
>> One thing we would like to see is the separators added to those browse
>> headings.
>>
>> Also, +1 to the idea of setting the All Subjects index to browse by
>> default so that you can get the entire string. In speaking to multiple
>> Evergreen sites, I have not heard from one that does not want the
>> entire subject string to display. I'll file a LP bug for that too.
>>
>> Kathy
>>
>> Kathy Lussier
>> Project Coordinator
>> Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
>> (508) 343-0128
>> klussier at masslnc.org
>> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
>>
>> On 6/6/2014 1:24 PM, Donald Butterworth wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the great response Mike!
>>
>> For the subject browse, I'm not yet familiar enough with authority
>> record links in Evergreen to know if this is viable solution. There
>> are an incredible number of subject permutations which would make it
>> impossible to anticipate every possible subject that would be legitimate.
>>
>> Is there any support out in Evergreen Land for making option two the
>> default? We really are out of step with the rest of the library
>> community. I can't think of another library system that has a subject
>> browse index, that doesn't include the entire subject phrase.
>>
>> For the series browse, I'm pretty sure we didn't do anything special
>> to make it appear. It just show up after the upgrade ... which is real good.
>>
>> Is there any support in Evergreen Land to include Series Browse as a
>> default that excludes the subfield "v" as part of the indexing?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Mike Rylander <mrylander at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Don,
>>>
>>> For the subjects, there are two ways to handle it.  The first is to
>>> add authority records and link those to the appropriate bib records.
>>> This will get you what you want without any further configuration, as
>>> authority is browse-indexed the way you describe by default.
>>>
>>> The second way involves new configuration entries and a partial
>>> reingest, but it can certainly be done.  You'll need a new
>>> browse-specific indexing definition to replace the one that's
>>> piggybacking on the exiting topic index.  For the 650, something
>>> along the lines of:
>>>
>>> INSERT INTO config.metabib_field (name, field_class, label, format,
>>> xpath, search_field, facet_field, browse_field, authority_xpath,
>>> browse_xpath)
>>>    VALUES ('browse_topic', 'subject', 'Browse Topic', 'marcxml',
>>> '//marc:datafield[@tag="650"]', false, false, true, '//*[@code="0"]',
>>> '//*[contains("avxyz", at code)]'); UPDATE config.metabib_field SET
>>> browse_field = false WHERE name = 'topic' AND field_class =
>>> 'subject';
>>>
>>> All of that can also be done in the staff client through Admin ->
>>> Server Administration -> MARC Search/Facet Fields.  After that,
>>> you'll need to perform a browse reingest after hours.  Something like
>>> the following will do it in one fell swoop:
>>>
>>> SELECT metabib.reingest_metabib_field_entries(id, TRUE, FALSE, TRUE)
>>> FROM biblio.record_entry; DELETE FROM metabib.browse_entry WHERE id
>>> NOT IN (SELECT entry FROM metabib.browse_entry_def_map UNION SELECT
>>> entry FROM metabib.browse_entry_simple_heading_map);
>>>
>>> Series is not indexed for browse by default, so I assume you mean the
>>> series facet?  Assuming so, you could replace the MODS-based XPath
>>> for the Series Title indexing definition with one that goes directly
>>> to the MARC and excludes the fields you don't want.  That would be
>>> more involved, though.  See here for the current mapping used:
>>> http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-mapping.html#relateditem
>>>
>>> HTH,
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Donald Butterworth
>>> <don.butterworth at asburyseminary.edu> wrote:
>>>> Colleagues,
>>>>
>>>> We recently upgraded to the 2.5.2 release and, as a cataloger, I
>>>> was ecstatic to find that "Browse the Catalog" is now available. I
>>>> will use this feature extensively when assigning author names,
>>>> series, and subjects.
>>>>
>>>> The author and title indexes looks great, but there is one tweak in
>>>> the subject index and one in series that I want to make.
>>>>
>>>> In subjects each individual subject subfield is being indexed
>>>> rather than the whole line. For example:
>>>>
>>>> 650  0 Conflict management -- Religious aspects -- Christianity
>>>>
>>>> is being displayed in the results list as
>>>>
>>>> * Conflict management
>>>> * Religious aspects
>>>> * Christianity
>>>>
>>>> What do I need to do to change this?
>>>>
>>>> In series I don't want the subfield "v" to be included in the
>>>> results list display. For example:
>>>>
>>>> Tyndale studies ; v. 1 (1)
>>>> Tyndale studies ; v. 2 (1)
>>>> Tyndale studies ; v. 3 (1)
>>>>
>>>> should display as
>>>>
>>>> Tyndale studies ; (3)
>>>>
>>>> Again, what do we need to do to change this?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for you insights!
>>>>
>>>> Don
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Don Butterworth
>>>> Faculty Associate / Librarian III
>>>> B.L. Fisher Library
>>>> Asbury Theological Seminary
>>>> don.butterworth at asburyseminary.edu
>>>> (859) 858-2227
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mike Rylander
>>>   | Director of Research and Development  | Equinox Software, Inc. /
>>> Your Library's Guide to Open Source  | phone:  1-877-OPEN-ILS
>>> (673-6457)  | email:  miker at esilibrary.com  | web:
>>> http://www.esilibrary.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Don Butterworth
>> Faculty Associate / Librarian III
>> B.L. Fisher Library
>> Asbury Theological Seminary
>> don.butterworth at asburyseminary.edu
>> (859) 858-2227
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Mike Rylander
>   | Director of Research and Development
>   | Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source  | phone:  1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)  | email:  miker at esilibrary.com  | web:  http://www.esilibrary.com