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

Take into account status of DBS entries #79

Closed
acka47 opened this Issue Sep 23, 2015 · 4 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@acka47
Contributor

acka47 commented Sep 23, 2015

We will somehow have to take into account the status of the libraries as indicated in the DBS csv file.

In total, there are 16,624 entries/rows. The different status are distributed like this:

  • aktiv: 9,503
  • no status entry: 3,748
  • geschlossen/aufgelöst: 2,068
  • keine Beteiligung an DBS: 678
  • aufgegangen/übernommen: 399
  • vorübergeh. geschlossen: 187
  • nur Adresse erfasst: 41

We will have to talk to the DBS colleagues and decide what we will do with entries that have a status other than aktiv.

@acka47 acka47 self-assigned this Sep 23, 2015

@acka47 acka47 added the working label Sep 28, 2015

@acka47

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@acka47

acka47 Sep 28, 2015

Contributor

Though the numbers above are from an old csv file, the underlying problem is still there. For the time being we will only include entries with status 1 ("aktiv"). The other might be interesting but it is probably better when we don't include them because:

  1. The entries might be quite old having been added during the 1990ies.
  2. We can't reproduce when the status of an entry was changed which would be quite important information.
Contributor

acka47 commented Sep 28, 2015

Though the numbers above are from an old csv file, the underlying problem is still there. For the time being we will only include entries with status 1 ("aktiv"). The other might be interesting but it is probably better when we don't include them because:

  1. The entries might be quite old having been added during the 1990ies.
  2. We can't reproduce when the status of an entry was changed which would be quite important information.
@philboeselager

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@philboeselager

philboeselager Nov 5, 2015

Contributor

Currently processing only active Bibs, incl. geodata (see #49 and #50). Will index enriched data when back in the office (Nov. 10th).

Contributor

philboeselager commented Nov 5, 2015

Currently processing only active Bibs, incl. geodata (see #49 and #50). Will index enriched data when back in the office (Nov. 10th).

@philboeselager

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@philboeselager

philboeselager Nov 11, 2015

Contributor

@acka47 see processed data on q.....1, Index: "organisations-20151111-pvb"

Contributor

philboeselager commented Nov 11, 2015

@acka47 see processed data on q.....1, Index: "organisations-20151111-pvb"

@philboeselager philboeselager added review and removed working labels Nov 11, 2015

@acka47

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@acka47

acka47 Nov 13, 2015

Contributor

+1

Contributor

acka47 commented Nov 13, 2015

+1

@acka47 acka47 assigned philboeselager and unassigned acka47 Nov 13, 2015

@acka47 acka47 added deploy and removed review labels Nov 13, 2015

@philboeselager philboeselager removed the deploy label Nov 19, 2015

@acka47 acka47 added the deploy label Nov 19, 2015

@philboeselager philboeselager removed the deploy label Nov 19, 2015

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment