-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Books: Items: migrate volumes and series #16
Comments
Here is a list of different cases where “volumes” are involved. CASE 1 1 Book record , with different volumes (246__n), where the volume titles are different (246__p). Different ISBNs (020__u). Paper and ebooks In the new model we should have: Main record Each volume -> 1 record Each volume record will have items (1 paper and/or 1 electronic) CASE 2 1 Book record , with different volumes (246__n), but no different title and/or no different ISBN In the new system we should have: Main record Each volume -> 1 record Each volume record will have items (1 paper and/or 1 electronic) CASE 3 1 book series, different volumes, but the book series is not considered as a periodical https://cds.cern.ch/search?f=490__a&p=De%20Gruyter%20studies%20in%20mathematical%20physics
CASE 4 (a few cases in our collection) 1 book series, different volumes, the book series is considered as a periodical with an ISSN and we have a subscription (small subset of above) Ex: https://cds.cern.ch/record/1346068?ln=en
Strategy to handle the migration of those records In my view, the volume records should use the same data model as the main record, and both records should be linked by a parent/child relation. So we it would cover cases where there is only 1 information that differs (volume) and all other information are inherited (or simply visible) from Parent record, and cases where more information differ (title, publication date in some cases publisher, abstract…) Is it what you had it mind?
|
In order to create the links between a parent record (main) and a child record (volume), I thought we could use this element already present in the data model: related_record.yml which is already used to create links between 2 editions of the same book (information currently stored in 775). I have modified a bit the element to make it more accurate. Please find it attached to this ticket, if you believe this is ok, you can replace it in the model. (I've replace .yml by .txt because Github wouldn't let me attach a .yml file...) |
In our system, to model Series/Volumes/Items, we will have the following:
Series
: a Document referencing a list of VolumesVolume
: a Document referencing a list of ItemsEdition
: it is just the name of the Document (of a Series, of a Volume, of a simple Document)BibRecs have information about Volumes in fields:
246__v
: volume300__a
: will contain the number of volumesIn legacy,
Series
are BibRecs andVolumes
areItems
where Item description states the volume name, for example:Series
3 volumes
TODO before migration
246__v
/300__a
)description
field that contains the volume name (several different formats, tricky...). The number of Items attached to that BibRec should correspond to the300__a
number...Series
by fixing metadata and attaching all the Volumes BibRecsThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: