No data for related records (Alma)

hbz / lobid-resources

Transformation, web frontend, and API for the hbz catalog as LOD

http://lobid.org/resources

Eclipse Public License 2.0

8 stars 7 forks source link

No data for related records (Alma) #1179

Closed hagbeck closed 3 years ago

hagbeck commented 3 years ago

Currently there are no IDs to related records such as multi volume works.

Example: 990225056670206441 (TT003907920) is part of 990050000600206441 (HT006855611). In Alma this relation seems to be documented via field 773

773 08 |w (DE-605)HT006855611 |q 3

and only via hbz-ID and not via MMS-ID. But the representation in the publishing results might be different.

Btw.: 990225056670206441 (TT003907920) is an example without DE-290 as owner

blackwinter commented 3 years ago

The planned, but not yet enabled, related records enrichment might be helpful here. The existing linking entries (based on the hbz-ID) originate from Aleph CC.

hagbeck commented 3 years ago

Today I've learned that we don't get MMS-IDs for related records for the time being. So we have to use the hbz-/Aleph-ID in MARC field 773 subfield w. Subfield q seems to be the volume number.

dr0i commented 3 years ago

Moving this up to "ready", since we should care about this because at 26th April we have to deal with it. As I understand the field is not yet in the source MARC but we can treat it in the morph as if it were already present.

blackwinter commented 3 years ago

Linking fields - based on the hbz-ID - are already present. This doesn't change with the initial publishing after Go Live.

The question is, AFAIUI, if/when MMS IDs become available for linking.

dr0i commented 3 years ago

Deployed to production, see e.g. http://alma.lobid.org/resources/990225056670206441.json.

UBmakla commented 3 years ago

no data for related records in 990225980070206441

dr0i commented 3 years ago

990225980070206441 seems to have it's hasPart information in MARC 830$0.w - at least there is no 773 in the MARC sources (and that's the field that was treated in https://github.com/hbz/lobid-resources/pull/1217 ):

<datafield tag="830" ind1=" " ind2="0">
<subfield code="a">Kunst & Kohle</subfield>
<subfield code="w">(DE-605)HT019688715</subfield>

So it seems we have to take MARC 830$0.w into account, too?

TobiasNx commented 3 years ago

830 is refering to Series Added Entry-Uniform Title

Series added entry consisting of a series title alone.

An 830 field is usually justified by a series statement (field 490) or a general note (field 500) relating to the series. For reproductions, it may be justified by a series statement in subfield $f of field 533 (Reproduction Note)

(Source)

Subfield $w:

$w - Bibliographic record control number [830]

See description of this subfield in Appendix A: Control Subfields.

(Source)

TobiasNx commented 3 years ago

I added 830 to isPartOf and filtered duplicates out with an if conditional.

TobiasNx commented 3 years ago

we should leave the ticket open and add "labels" in the "hasSuperordinate"

TobiasNx commented 3 years ago

and do we need "

	1.-5. Gesamttitel - mit Zählung - ohne Verknüpfung (Verlegerreihen)

" as relations which are represented in 490 but have no corresponding 830?

dr0i commented 3 years ago

Deployed, see e.g. https://alma.lobid.org/resources/search?q=HT017015300&format=json. Closed.

dr0i commented 3 years ago

Reported in https://github.com/hbz/lobid-resources/issues/1258: The title is missing in http://alma.lobid.org/resources/search?q=990225980070206441&format=json although it's in the Alma Marc Source (as noted here https://github.com/hbz/lobid-resources/issues/1179#issuecomment-827591591). Also, the id should be a valid lod URI like: "http://lobid.org/resources/$HT-NR#!" .

dr0i commented 3 years ago

Deployed, see e.g. https://alma.lobid.org/resources/search?q=HT017015300&format=json.