The bug report says: If someone edits the framework to make any field of the 999 visible, then any edit to any field of the MARC record results in a duplicate 999 with the biblionumber repeated. I just checked our framework, Our 999 subfields are hidden. . . . Which makes me wonder if the problem has somehow gotten worse in 3.10? will add a note to the bug report. On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Wagner, Jane <jwagner@liblime.com> wrote:
See http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=6657 for one possible cause.
Jane Wagner Senior Project Manager LibLime, a division of PTFS Content Management and Library Solutions 11501 Huff Court North Bethesda, MD 20895 (301) 654-8088 x 151 jwagner@liblime.com
-----Original Message----- From: koha-bounces@lists.katipo.co.nz [mailto:koha-bounces@lists.katipo.co.nz] On Behalf Of Elaine Bradtke Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:49 PM To: koha; Doug Google Kingston; Doug Kingston Subject: [Koha] Records not showing in OPAC and multiple biblionumbers
Koha 3.10.02 We have set up 942n to have two choices Hide in OPAC and Show in OPAC. The record suppression has been working fine until recently. The staff member who checks and unsuppresses records says there are a bunch which have accumulated that remain hidden, even after he's changed the field to Show. If I run a search on suppress=1(the code for hide in OPAC) they come up. Looking closer at these records, it turns out they have multiple 999c fields Here's an example: 942 ## - ADDED ENTRY ELEMENTS (KOHA) 2 Source of classification or shelving scheme VWML c Koha [default] item type Components n Hide in OPAC Show in OPAC h Call number QS 40 999 ## - SYSTEM CONTROL NUMBERS (KOHA) c Koha biblionumber 18235 c Koha biblionumber 18235 | 14922 c Koha biblionumber 14922
If I delete the extra 999c fields the record will unsuppress. However, I think this may be part of some other problem, but I'm not sure if it's an indexing error, or what.
The actual biblionumber is 18235. But when I search on that biblionumber I get two nearly identical records: one is 18235 and one is 18235 | 14922 The difference between the two is in the 999c field
We sometimes combine bliblios when we find duplicates, and this may be the source of the double number. Any ideas what might be causing it, and what I should do to correct it?
Should I file a bug, or is this an internal setting gone awry?
-- Elaine Bradtke Data Wrangler VWML English Folk Dance and Song Society | http://www.efdss.org Cecil Sharp House, 2 Regent's Park Road, London NW1 7AY Tel +44 (0) 20 7485 2206 (This number is for the English Folk Dance and Song Society in London, England. If you wish to phone me personally, send an e-mail first. I work off site) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Registered Company No. 297142 Charity Registered in England and Wales No. 305999 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - "Writing about music is like dancing about architecture" --Elvis Costello (Musician magazine No. 60 (October 1983), p. 52) _______________________________________________ Koha mailing list http://koha-community.org Koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha
-- Elaine Bradtke Data Wrangler VWML English Folk Dance and Song Society | http://www.efdss.org Cecil Sharp House, 2 Regent's Park Road, London NW1 7AY Tel +44 (0) 20 7485 2206 (This number is for the English Folk Dance and Song Society in London, England. If you wish to phone me personally, send an e-mail first. I work off site) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Registered Company No. 297142 Charity Registered in England and Wales No. 305999 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Writing about music is like dancing about architecture" --Elvis Costello (Musician magazine No. 60 (October 1983), p. 52)