Batch Importer (Bib/Acq)
(UXPROD-47)
|
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | mod-source-record-manager |
| Components: | None |
| Affects versions: | None |
| Fix versions: | 3.3.0 | Parent: | Batch Importer (Bib/Acq) |
| Type: | Bug | Priority: | P2 |
| Reporter: | Theodor Tolstoy (One-Group.se) | Assignee: | Khamidulla Abdulkhakimov |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | data-import, epam-folijet, folijet-support, has-testrail, sprint-133, support | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||||||||||
| Issue links: |
|
||||||||||||||||
| Sprint: | |||||||||||||||||
| Story Points: | 5 | ||||||||||||||||
| Development Team: | Folijet Support | ||||||||||||||||
| Release: | Lotus R1 2022 | ||||||||||||||||
| Affected Institution: |
!!!ALL!!!
|
||||||||||||||||
| Epic Link: | Batch Importer (Bib/Acq) | ||||||||||||||||
| RCA Group: | Data related (ex. Can be detected with large dataset only) | ||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
Overview:
Expected Results:
Based on the Default mapping rules, one of the following should have happened:
Actual Results: The EBSCO ICs just discovered this behavior in their tools. The current set of Default rules, forces us to edit all rules to avoid the above-described behavior. URL: The Kiwi Mapping rules for 022 has the flag set: |
| Comments |
| Comment by Anya [ 18/Jan/22 ] |
|
Ann-Marie Breaux - not sure what mod-data import to re-assign this to - Theodor Tolstoy (One-Group.se) and I are guessing it should be mod-source record - manager.... I have left it in SUP for now... |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 18/Jan/22 ] |
|
Hi Anya Thanks for the comment. I've updated it. Theodor Tolstoy (One-Group.se) Would the desired behavior be to put each 020$a (and any qualifier for it) in its own Identifier field? So for the above example: ISBN 0870990004 (v. 1) And then also do the same with 020 $z if repeated in the same 020 field? |
| Comment by Theodor Tolstoy (One-Group.se) [ 18/Jan/22 ] |
|
Ann-Marie Breaux Yes. And I believe the rules allow this given you add the above-mentioned entityPerRepeatedSubfield flag into the rules for 020. Most Identifier mappings already use them. But it would be good if it was tested, of course. And I do now want to tamper with the bugfest rules.... |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 18/Jan/22 ] |
|
Hi Theodor Tolstoy (One-Group.se) Please don't tamper with Bugfest! |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 18/Jan/22 ] |
|
Devs - please use the attached file: *ISBN default refinement.mrc *to test It has
Thank you! |
| Comment by Khamidulla Abdulkhakimov [ 31/Jan/22 ] |
|
Hello Ann-Marie Breaux. I've tested on folio-snapshot and got these results:
Could you confirm that this behavior is appropriate? |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 31/Jan/22 ] |
|
Hi Khamidulla Abdulkhakimov Close! I added the expected results after Bugfix in the description. All in the example are correct except for the last one. I'll move it back to In progress. |
| Comment by Khamidulla Abdulkhakimov [ 04/Feb/22 ] |
|
Hello Ann-Marie Breaux. I compared the results with the expected results from the description. Everything looks great. Can you help pick up some test cases related to fields "020" and "024"? The logic of the parameter concat_subfields_by_name has been changed and I want to make sure that the changes affect nothing. Thank you. cc: Kateryna Senchenko, Oleksandr Bashtynskyi
|
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 07/Feb/22 ] |
|
Hi Khamidulla Abdulkhakimov I updated the ISBN default refinement.mrc file to have a couple more 020 examples, and added the 024 028 test.mrc file. Please let me know if you see any issues or if all looks good. Thank you! |
| Comment by Khamidulla Abdulkhakimov [ 08/Feb/22 ] |
|
Hello Ann-Marie Breaux, No errors were noted. Thank you, moving to in review. |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 09/Feb/22 ] |
|
Hi Khamidulla Abdulkhakimov Tested on folio-snapshot-load, and all looks great. Thank you! Assigned RCA of Data-related, since the requirement for this is based on incorrectly fielded/subfielded MARC data (e.g. cannot have 2 $a subfields in an 020 field, but many legacy records do, so mapping rules need to account for it. |