Versions Compared

Old Version 6

changes.mady.by.user David García Sánchez

Saved on

compared with

New Version 7

changes.mady.by.user Annalisa Di Sabato

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

AW "Wonderland". Tag 130 is included in the ACCESS POINT column.

•Search for «Contains» in ALL Marc field for «Wonderland» and default orderin AUTH for Access Point and in BIB for Title (tag 245). 


•Tag 130 is included in column «Access point». In the column «Uniform title» you have tag 240.
•
•Please consider the second bibliographic record. In this case the record doesn’t have an author, but a tag 130 «Alice’s adeventures in Wonderland». So in the column for Access Point, you’ll find  the 130. Do you prefer to see it or prefer to see an empty field (because the record doesn’t have an author)? In the second case, the information relating to 130, would be lost.

Comments: Sarah Ross I believe that especially for serials, seeing the 130 will be very helpful.

Pat Williams: Why is "Varrin, Alexandra" appearing in the authority results for this search? The tag indicates that this information is coming from the 670, but it is very unlikely that we would be interested in seeing information from an authorities citation. Usually we want to see the established form of the heading and its cross references. But maybe I'm wrong and people would want to see this?

@Cult: Yes Pat, some people have asked for an ANY KEYWORD search even in authority records, it means that I can find "wonderland" also in the tag note (670). In this case of course in the main access point I'll have an estabilished heading different from the term searched (that it is in tag 670). But if they prefer, we can change this behavior and look for the term only in the 1XX / 4XX / 5XX tag (excluding note tags).

Jacquie: I prefer the first option (blank author field, but display the 130) since this combination of data elements is frequently used for describing continuing resources.  Pat Williams Do you think that the error you found is another situation where data was used to show the display, rather than actual functionality, as with the 240 tag above?  I hope that's it!

...