Since name and subject authority records function much the same way, I don’t see a problem with sharing the Solr index and setting up a similar processing workflow for all of the data.
As for verifying whether the same heading in multiple places actually represents the same thing… that’s a tricky problem. Presumably when we come up with rules for matching bibliographic records to authority records in the MST, similar rules could be applied to match one set of authority records against another set and identify potential problem areas. It won’t be simple, though!
- Demian
From: Ya'aqov Ziso [mailto:yaaqovz@...]
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 3:35 PM
To: Demian Katz
Cc: Mark Triggs; vufind-general@...; Ralph LeVan
Subject: Re: Alphabetical subject browse - implementing libraries?
This is exciting Demian. Thinking ahead, when LCSH is added: can LCSH be added into the SAME source (having different tagging for its fields) and retaining the same three sets?
Also, per set of “in local set, not in NAF.” -- what's the check? i.e., how does one verify 'Twiggs, Mark, 1980-' in NAF is not the same as 'Twiggs, Mark' in local?
Ya'aqov
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Demian Katz <demian.katz@...>>
wrote:
Right now, if Mark loaded his own records and used my harvesting tool to get the full NAF, he would end up with one set of records tagged as NAF and one set of records tagged as local. Some records would exist in both sets.
In the hypothetical future scenario where we use XC MST to append a “local” flag to selected NAF records, we would have a little more control over how things worked out, but we would still potentially have three distinct sets of records: “in NAF, not in local set”, “in NAF AND in local set”, “c.”
- Demian
From: Ya'aqov Ziso [mailto:yaaqovz@...>]
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 2:57 PM
To: Demian Katz; Mark Triggs; vufind-general@...>; Ralph LeVan
Subject: Re: Alphabetical subject browse - implementing libraries?
Thank you Demian. The premise of the proposed model is that global files NAF/LCSH are available via API, as they provide the most conclusive information. If we create one VuFind source that includes the local records AND the global files (all adhering to MARC format), the global files will be the larger, more conclusive files.
Per Mark's NAL situation -- in the created VuFind index (including global+local) the local will be a subset, tagged as local, right?
Ya'aqov
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Demian Katz <demian.katz@...>> wrote:
See my comments below in blue.
The local sets will ALWAYS be a subset of the global set. NAF and Terminologies thesauri files are created collectively by members of libraries all over the world, no one library holding them all.
I don’t know that they will ALWAYS be a subset – in some cases, isn’t it possible that the local file may contain locally-created headings that do not exist in the global file? In this case, there is overlap between the sets, but neither one is an exact subset of the other.
It seems that NAL's authority records (in fact anyone's local authority records not available at large) are in MARC21 authority format can be ADDED to the VuFind source index to be created. Demian, does this seem correct to you? if yes there will be a MARC21 minimal format to be adhered to an vetted with NAL and others interested.
Yes, it’s very easy to add new authority records to VuFind’s index. As long as the same basic types of information (heading, see also, use for) are present somewhere in the MARC record, you can create custom maps to load them to the correct fields in the Solr index.
- Demian
|