Improve Browse by Subject (Primo VE)
In Primo VE, only one of “vocabulary” is available - “Library of Congress Subject Headings.” The choice to use this “vocabulary” is automatically made for you when you choose “Browse by Library of Congress Subject.” The index “Library of Congress name authority records for 651” is not available through this search as it is through the Metadata Editor via Alma. Thus, many, many LC subject headings cannot actually be browsed in Primo VE. Example, you can find NO headings beginning with “Colombia – Commerce,” because there is no LC subject authority for “Colombia – Commerce” or for any further subdivision of that heading. You CANNOT find the heading “Colombia – Commerce – History” by browse in Primo. Browse by subject gives incomplete results - nearly half the records are not discoverable using this method. Many researchers use this method to find their materials.
Jamen McGranahan
shared this idea
-
Steve Perisho
commented
Please do vote for this. As Theology Librarian at Seattle Pacific, I turn often to the Harvard catalog to identity monographs on particular Biblical passages. It would be nice to be able to count on Primo for this as well.
-
Natalee
commented
Adding 630 fields to the Subject Browse search would be useful for patrons. 630 fields are already included in the Advanced Search (subject contains, is exact, starts with). Most patrons won’t know that 630 fields are excluded from the Subject Browse search. Including 630 subject fields in both keyword and browse searching would provide a more consistent user experience. Other library catalogs, including the Library of Congress catalog, include 630 fields in subject browse searches. The 630 field is the Subject Added Entry—Uniform Title field, and is defined as “A preferred title used as a subject access point”--https://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/6xx/630.html [oclc.org]
Here are a few examples:
630 00 $a Aesop's fables.
630 00 $a Arabian nights.
630 00 $a Beowulf $x Authorship.
630 00 $a Bible. $pActs $vCommentaries.
630 00 $a Bible. $pNew Testament.
630 00 $a Chanson de Roland $x Criticism, Textual.
630 00 $a New York times $v Indexes.
630 00 $a Qu'ran.Additionally, complex subject headings can be challenging to get right in a keyword search. Browse searching can make it easier for patrons to find information on the topics they are researching. Finding books on biblical passages is easier with browse searching.
The format for biblical passage subjects is:
Bible—Book--Chapter in Roman numerals--Verse(s) in Arabic numerals.
Example:
Bible.--Luke, XV, 11-32--Relation to Genesis. -
Crystal Clements commented
Agree with previous comments--this is necessary.
-
Diana Brooking commented
Someone who knows the MARC format needs to configure this index (and all other indexes) please. MARC is not dead yet ;-)
-
Anonymous
commented
This request needs to be amended to include all relevant MARC fields, 600, 610, 611, 630, 650, and 651 second indicator 0. I assume this is an out of the box feature. Surely other libraries in other parts of the world might want other vocabularies as their default subject browse?
-
Adam Schiff
commented
It's truly stunning that Primo VE does not provide browse by ALL of the MARC fields used for LC subjects: 600, 610, 611, 630, 650, and 651.
-
Helen Griffiths
commented
Please give an option to combine results from different subject vocabularies (and include one for local subject headings / variable thesauri (650 2nd indicator 7 - Source specified in subfield $2)).
We are currently moving to PrimoVE from Primo and these restrictions are a backward step.
As Karen commented (June 11, 2019!!) patrons should not have to understand the difference.
-
Manu Schwendener commented
+1
-
Chingmy Lam commented
Yes, it would be great if apart from 650s, the following MARC fields:
600s, 610s, 611s, 630s and 651s can also be included in the browse by subject search since they are all subject headings. -
Anonymous
commented
This improvement is critical.
-
Karen
commented
Voting for this since many of our subjects do not display in Subject browse without this vocabulary.
I would like to see the vocabularies combined, not simply listed as an option if it would mean separate drop down choices in the Primo VE display. I don't think patrons or other staff should have to understand the difference in choosing for browse.