Display related holdings for monographs only for the 773 $w relation and not for the 8xx $w relation
When filtering to a certain location via facets, you often get results from other locations too, which is unexpected from patrons perspective in many cases. This is caused by the current related records setting which is also taking locations with related records into account. The display is correct for analytical records without inventory (book chapters and articles), but not for the other monographical resources.
What we wish to achieve is the following:
When the record of a book chapter, journal issue or journal article (i.e. a record containing a 773 field with $w) is viewed in Primo, the holding of the record linked via 773 $w is displayed.
When records contain a series link (8xx $w) or a related record (76x/77x/78x $w - exception: 773), we do wish to display a link to the related record (via system number), but not the related holding.
Right now, the configuration does not offer the needed flexibility.
Nikol Stepan, SLSP
shared this idea
-
Manu Schwendener
commented
NERS 8161, open for voting now.
-
Elisa Dell'Ambrogio commented
For the next round of voting the NERS ID is 8161
-
Manu Schwendener
commented
This also leads to wrong information being shown to the patrons.
'Available at ... and other locations'.
No, only one library in our IZ has the printed version.
This teaches our patrons that they can't trust what they see in our catalog.
-
Manu Schwendener
commented
NERS 7857, open for voting now
-
Manu Schwendener
commented
Part of this is a bug fix, not a feature request:
When I turn off 'Display related holdings for monographs', the library facet should behave accordingly and NOT show libraries that stem from the 'related holdings' part.I even think that this is how the library facet should behave when 'Display related holdings for monographs' is turned on: the facets need to filter my short title list. I do not want to see a library facet because that library has OTHER titles.
-
Fredrik S. Pettersen
commented
We strongly support a more nuanced treatment of records with a 773 field and the effect it has on related records.
In addition to what you write in the idea, we've struggled with the fact that the system doesn't take the second indicator into account either. A 773 second indicator can either be # or 8. # represents "In", which indicates that the record is a part of the Host Item, while an 8 does not. When this is not taken into account, it causes trouble with holdings information. Our suggestion would be that a change to this behavior is considered within the scope of this idea as well.
-
Manu Schwendener
commented
> When filtering to a certain location via facets, you often get results from other locations too
As long as this is not fixed, Primo VE just looks broken/unreliable for our patrons:
I filter by a certain library, but the short title list includes titles that are NOT in that library. -
Anonymous
commented
I agree with Luzern, absolutely a must-have! You dont find the books you know are in the library because you dont expect this false behaviour.
-
Manu Schwendener
commented
There's an additional problem for consortia – we hope this idea will solve that as well:
– I'm in the search scope slot "This IZ"
– I filter with the facet 'Available in libraries'
– In the resulting list I see titles that are only available onlineThe reason for this is that some library in *another* IZ in our consortium has the title as print.
That just makes the facet 'Available in libraries' (which is supposed to limit to print) look broken/unreliable.
(SF00884291)
-
F. Roth @ ZHB Lucerne
commented
ZHB Lucerne strongly supports this request! It is incomprehensible, why filtering for a certain location delivers results where the filtered location is then not displayed in the full view. Absolutely a must have feature.