Hi Kerry,
I'm sorry to be confusing / pedantic (because you
aren't dull :)) - Like you I envisage a query such as:
"all locations holding Journal of anatomy v 45, no 3, Jun 3
1995 and available"
this mixes search attributes from 2 context
sets:
resource context set = title, enumeration
chronology
holdings context set = available (location is also an
attribute in this case however the search was for all)
May be we don't
currently have an attribute set that covers enumeration and chronology, in which
case I'll have a stab at it too. I just think it makes "holdings" too
complicated to think of it as holdings, when it is really qualifying the
resource,
Jan
Hi Jan
No - that makes sense!!
But if I am searching for the journal then I want' to search
enumeration and chronology to make sure you hold the issue you want, or
am I missing something really basic here?
sorry to be dull
Kerry
On 18/09/2007, at 8:58 AM, Janifer Gatenby wrote:
Thanks Kerry,
I can't think of a reasonable
example
A search is usually for a specific article,
therefore a specific issue. The bibliographic part of the search would
include the enumeration and chronology. This wouldn't be part of the
holdings attributes of the search.
Unlikely example: "journal of anatomy where the
holdings are incomplete" ?
"journal of anatomy where the holdings are
complete"?
Can you think of a likely one?
Janifer
Thanks Jan
That is so eloquently what I meant when I said it is our
problem!
Why don't you think you would want to search extent of
holdings?
Kerry
On 17/09/2007, at 9:10 PM, Janifer Gatenby wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
I'm sorry that I wasn't on line when these
discussions happened. I think that Ray mentioned that I am working
on a holdings context set to match the ISO holdings schema. I'm
going to start with the holdings attrubute set that I did with Pieter
van Lierop in 2000 and cut it back to only those search attributes for
which we can find use cases. http://www.loc.gov/z3950/agency/defns/holdattr.html
I'm leaving aside the debate about whether or not
link resolvers can do the job. I think this is a red herring -
some software, OPAC, Resolver or otherwise has to send a query to
the ILS database that contains holdings item records and their current
status and usage history. In a bibliographic sense we distinguish
between known item (really "known resource") queries and subject queries
(no known resource). Subject queries could have holdings search
attributes, e.g. "search for dinosaurs where copies are available at my
branch library". More likely holdings attributes are attached
to known resource queries. "Do you have any copies of this
resource available" or "does your x branch have an available copy
of this resource". It really is an awful solution to
send a query to discover all the item identifiers of a resource or group
of resources, then to send multiple NCIP transactions to discover
availability.
The attribute set above contains a lot of detail
about enumeration and chronology - all of which is actually at the
resource level not the holdings level. It also contains attributes
that I don't think would be used for seaching such as extent of
holdings.
I think that the searchable holdings attributes
would be - identifier, location and availability. Does anybody
want to add any more?
Janifer
Ray
When it comes to searching holdings
Matthew talked about one
scenario where a search result returns
400 holdings and you then want
to find which of those holdings are from
particular places - eg the
Bodlian and the British Library. This to me is needs
a Search
service.
How do you feel about Ashley's suggestion
that that be a client side
problem?
I should have said the
reason I think this is our problem is I might want to apply this
criteria in the initial search rather than after the result is
retrieved (:-) Sorry to be flippant. its late in the day
and that is a dangerous time for the Australian sense of humour!
Kerry
Kerry
Blinco e-Framework and Standards
Manager, Link Affiliates, University of Southern Queensland;
and Technical Standards
Adviser to the Department of Education Science and Training
(DEST). Australia. Email:
kblinco@powerup.com.au Phone: +61 7
3871
2699
Ph
(Mobile) : +61 419 787
992
The
information contained in this e-mail message and any files
may be
confidential information, and may also be the subject of legal
professional privilege. If
you think you may not be the intended recipient, or if you have
received this e-mail in error, please
contact the sender immediately and delete all copies of this e-mail.
If you are not the intended recipient,
you must not reproduce any part of this e-mail or disclose its
contents to any other party.
This
email represents the views of the individual sender, except where the
sender expressly states otherwise.
Kerry
Blinco e-Framework and Standards
Manager, Link Affiliates, University of Southern Queensland;
and Technical Standards Adviser
to the Department of Education Science and Training (DEST).
Australia. Email:
kblinco@powerup.com.au Phone: +61 7 3871
2699
Ph (Mobile)
: +61 419 787 992
The
information contained in this e-mail message and any files
may be
confidential information, and may also be the subject of legal
professional privilege. If you
think you may not be the intended recipient, or if you have received this
e-mail in error, please
contact the sender immediately and delete all copies of this e-mail. If
you are not the intended recipient,
you must not reproduce any part of this e-mail or disclose its contents to
any other party.
This
email represents the views of the individual sender, except where the
sender expressly states otherwise.
|