search

hbz / lobid-resources

Transformation, web frontend, and API for the hbz catalog as LOD
http://lobid.org/resources
Eclipse Public License 2.0
7 stars 7 forks source link

Multiple title keys #1209

Closed TobiasNx closed 3 years ago

TobiasNx commented 3 years ago

See: HT003176544

https://github.com/hbz/lobid-resources/blob/d986f75654e26989e9d3abb77d63b86ce29ff9d5/src/test/resources/alma/(DE-605)HT003176544.json

TobiasNx commented 3 years ago

http://lobid.org/resources/HT003176544.json

In comparison to our old transformation we have multiple differences. Title information should be rebuild.

Marc provides this:

  <datafield tag="245" ind1="0" ind2="0">
    <subfield code="a">Reisen in Deutschland</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">deutsches Handbuch f&#252;r Fremdenverkehr</subfield>
    <subfield code="n">Band 2</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">Reisegebiete in Berlin (West), Bremen, Hamburg, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Niedersachsen, Rheinland-Pfalz, Saarland, Schleswig-Holstein</subfield>
    <subfield code="c">hrsg. im Auftrag des Deutschen Fremdenverkehrsverbandes e.V. Frankfurt/Main und in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Deutschen B&#228;derverband e.V</subfield>
  </datafield>

At the moment $a and $p are used as "title"-source. $b as "otherTitleInformation". $n is not morphed yet. (only as comment) $c is responsibilityStatement that can be excluded here and was solved in #1197.

$p should not end in "title" but in titleOfSubseries as used in lobid aleph. But perhapse we should use another key since it refers to volumes and not series.

TobiasNx commented 3 years ago

I morphed 245 $p to "titleOfSubSeries".

Conceptually "titleOfSubSeries" does not completely reflect "245 $$p Haupttitel das Bandes oder der Unterreihe" (https://service-wiki.hbz-nrw.de/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=483000321) We should think about changing the key in the future perhaps. @acka47

acka47 commented 3 years ago

Conceptually "titleOfSubSeries" does not completely reflect "245 $$p Haupttitel das Bandes oder der Unterreihe" (https://service-wiki.hbz-nrw.de/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=483000321) We should think about changing the key in the future perhaps.

Yes, this is not the right property and, additonally, the property used is now deprecated, see http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/P60517. So, we should think about a better one although this would mean an API break. We should probably better create a separate issue for this. I already looked at Bibframe and the RDA unconstrained properties but could not find anything that might fit.