Skip to main content
ExLibris
  • Subscribe by RSS
  • Ex Libris Knowledge Center

    Form Subdivisions in $x Mishandled by Automated BIB Correction

    • Article Type: General
    • Product: Aleph
    • Product Version: 21

    Description:
    The is a problem with "residual" subfields when BIB headings are automatically changed via Search Field Headings of Current Base (F3) or Other Base (Ctrl+F3).

    Examples of the problem:

    [Example 1]
    Authority record:
    150 $$a Judaism $$v Prayers and devotions
    450 $$a Jewish devotional literature
    450 $$a Jewish prayers
    450 $$a Jews $$v Prayer-books and devotions
    450 $$a Judaism $$v Prayer-books and devotions

    Correctly changes BIB:
    650 $$a Judaism $$v Prayer-books and devotions
    To
    650 $$a Judaism $$v Prayers and devotions

    BUT incorrectly changes BIB:
    650 $$a Judaism $$x Prayer-books and devotions
    To
    650 $$a Judaism $$v Prayers and devotions $$x Prayer-books and devotions.

    [Example 2]
    NO Authority Record

    Previously indexed BIB record contains:
    650 $$a Amphetamines $$x Law and legislation $$z United States $$x Congresses

    F3 incorrectly changes BIB:
    650 $$a Amphetamine abuse $$z United States $$x History
    To
    650 $$a Amphetamines $$z United States $$x Congresses $$x Law and legislation

    In the first example, the $$x subfield is incorrectly retained.

    In the second example, the order of the subfields in the updated record is different from the selected heading. Indexing treats the entries as different, so although the content is the same (only in a different order), this subject will have 2 index entries.
    650 $$a Amphetamines $$x Law and legislation $$z United States $$x Congresses
    650 $$a Amphetamines $$z United States $$x Congresses $$x Law and legislation

    Resolution:
    The reason the subfield x remains is because ALEPH uses “residual subfields”.
    Residual subfields are subfields which remain as part of the bibliographic record field when the remainder of the field has updated from the Authority library.

    In our case below we have a Bibliographic record:
    650 $$a Authority records $$x functionality

    It is updated manually from this authority record:
    150 $$a Authority records $$v functionality and usage
    450 $$a Authority records $$v functionality

    The residual sub field (x) remains and thus you get
    650 $$a Authority records $$v functionality and usage $$x functionality

    The system does not compare the x and v fields, it only adds the heading that you selected and then retains fields that did not appear in the selected heading.
    No change will be made to the way this works.

    The use of “residual subfields” also has many advantages.
    For example, you may have several bibliographic records with a 650 field such as this:

    650 $$a Car parks $$x planning
    650 $$a Car parks $$x construction
    650 $$a Car parks $$x multi level

    Then you want to change all of them to be:

    650 $$a Parking lots $$x planning
    650 $$a Parking lots $$x construction
    650 $$a Parking lots $$x multi level

    Because of the use of residual sub fields, you only need 1 Authority record to change “Car parks” to “Parking lots”. The residual subfield x would simply remain attached to the field. You do not need 3 separate authority records.

    In the examples above, as much as possible, the system leaves the record as the customer defined it (example 1, keeping the original subfield x; example 2, keeping the original azx subfield order). The response is to err on the side of the prior customer cataloging.

    Regarding indexing in example 2, if the X fields are removed from the field and the index entry is again selected via F3, the system will use the form in the selected heading, since, in this case, the cataloger has not already expressed a different subfield order preference.


    • Article last edited: 10/8/2013