Enable authority Record Enrichment in Primo VE on local subject fields
In addition to the indexing of bibliographic metadata, Primo VE indexes preferred and non-preferred terms from 1XX and 4XX fields in related Alma authority records. However, this works only in the generic advanced search Subject field.
We need Primo VE to enable authority record enrichment on local fields as well.
Indeed, we have configured local subject fields that are more specific than the default Subject field. These enable searching only on specific subject vocabularies. But configuring such fields does not include the enrichment capability.
Michael Hertig
shared this idea
-
Esther Ernst
commented
This enhancement is absolutely essential. We use several authority files in our catalogue. Advanced search is intended for more precise and targeted retrieval, so users should not lose the benefits of authority enrichment simply because they choose a specific subject vocabulary instead of the generic Subject field.
It is also important to note that "local" subject fields do not necessarily represent small, institution-specific vocabularies. In our case, they are based on the GND, the largest authority file in the German-speaking world. Users naturally expect equivalent access through preferred and non-preferred terms regardless of which subject field they search. The current behaviour, where searches with a 4XX term retrieve records in the generic Subject field but fail in the corresponding local subject field, is inconsistent and counterintuitive.
In practice, if non-preferred terms (4XX) are not indexed for a specific authority vocabulary, searching that vocabulary loses much of its value: users must already know and enter the preferred form (1XX) to retrieve relevant records, which largely defeats the purpose of maintaining authority records with rich synonym and variant-term references. -
Fredrik Solvang Pettersen
commented
We fully support this request. As a consortium managing Primo VE for more than 70 institutions, this is a limitation our members run into directly. We have configured local subject fields tied to specific vocabularies, precisely to allow more precise subject searching, only to find that authority enrichment from 1XX/4XX fields doesn't apply to those fields. This creates an inconsistent experience: users get preferred/non-preferred term expansion when searching the generic Subject field, but not when using the more targeted local fields that institutions have gone out of their way to configure. That undermines the whole point.
Extending authority enrichment to locally configured fields feels like a natural completion of functionality that already exists. We hope Clarivate will prioritize it.
-
Frédéric Walther
commented
This development would significantly improve user searches by exploiting the content of authority records.