Some refactoring in order to enable for easier integration of UNIMARC with the functional analysis codebase
UNIMARC functional analysis
Some tests
Please note that there wasn't a paper which would describe mapping UNIMARC fields to all user tasks, and the only report on that topic that I could find was:
Arastoopoor, Sholeh & Fattahi, Rahmatollah. (2013).
Mapping Unimarc Fields to FRBR Entities and User Tasks.
International Journal of Information Science and Management. 11. 43-56.
Fields only get mapped to the four primary user tasks (part of discovery) in this article, so I used only those ones. The file that contains those mappings can be found in resources under /unimarc/frbr-user-tasks.json.
It would take extremely much more time to create this mapping on my own. Likewise, it would take quite a lot of time to create a good and useful crosswalk between MARC21 and UNIMARC so that the analogous mapping can be formed (probably using these comprehensive specifications and further expanding them so that they're up to date).
Usage of some simple (almost-)readily available crosswalks and conversion specifications didn't seem quite appealing to me, as they only covered quite limited sets of fields (only a dozen or so). In addition, I feel like it's of a better value to use a mapping that's specifically made for the UNIMARC bibliographic format even though it maps to only a third of the designated expanded set of frbr user tasks.
This pull request consists of:
Please note that there wasn't a paper which would describe mapping UNIMARC fields to all user tasks, and the only report on that topic that I could find was:
Fields only get mapped to the four primary user tasks (part of discovery) in this article, so I used only those ones. The file that contains those mappings can be found in resources under
/unimarc/frbr-user-tasks.json
.It would take extremely much more time to create this mapping on my own. Likewise, it would take quite a lot of time to create a good and useful crosswalk between MARC21 and UNIMARC so that the analogous mapping can be formed (probably using these comprehensive specifications and further expanding them so that they're up to date).
Usage of some simple (almost-)readily available crosswalks and conversion specifications didn't seem quite appealing to me, as they only covered quite limited sets of fields (only a dozen or so). In addition, I feel like it's of a better value to use a mapping that's specifically made for the UNIMARC bibliographic format even though it maps to only a third of the designated expanded set of frbr user tasks.