Skip to content
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

Relator-terms from German cataloguing guideline RAK #389

Conversation

lahmann
Copy link
Contributor

@lahmann lahmann commented May 27, 2015

Demian, I have added the relator-terms from the German cataloguing guideline RAK to author-classification.ini.

1.) The RAK-relator-terms come in upper and lower case form, plus the abbreviation ending with a . - as Solrmarc and author-modification.bsh do not perform any string-manipulations on the MARC-Subfields 4/e and because of lower/upper case issues for RAK-relator-terms this could result in failures. One could reduce the list if one would transform the relator-terms to lower case and remove e.g. trailing .

2.) The RAK-relator-terms are commented out and in seperate lines - I think it would be best to keep the different sets of relator-terms in seperate blocks for maintenance reasons: e.g. if getConfigSetting (https://github.com/vufind-org/vufind/blob/improved-author-indexing/import/index_scripts/author-modification.bsh#L177) does support ini-arrays one could add the guideline-specific relator-terms as array-values.

demiankatz added a commit that referenced this pull request May 27, 2015
Relator-terms from German cataloguing guideline RAK
@demiankatz demiankatz merged commit 69f3f4e into vufind-org:improved-author-indexing May 27, 2015
@demiankatz
Copy link
Member

Thanks for this. I've gone ahead and merged it. If you would like to add some normalization of relator terms to make the comparisons slightly more fuzzy, I would have no objection to that, as long as we apply the same normalization to both the values found in the record and the values provided in the .ini to ensure total consistency. If you have time/inclination, feel free to open another PR for that.

Regarding support for arrays in getConfigSetting, this is unfortunately not present -- Java's support for .ini files is quite limited. We could, of course, implement it, but I'm not sure if it's worth the effort at this stage -- for now, it's probably simpler to stick with a single string and require users to merge things together to meet their local needs.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants