Hi Pablo: While I agree that the 001 should be populated with a unique bibliographic control number, it's not the way that Koha is typically set up.
In theory, it's configurable, but there are parts of Koha that expect the biblionumber to be in the 999$c field (e.g. MARC21slim2OPACResult.xsl). David Cook Systems Librarian Prosentient Systems 72/330 Wattle St, Ultimo, NSW 2007 > -----Original Message----- > Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:07:13 -0300 > From: Pablo Bianchi <pablo.bian...@gmail.com> > To: "Hernandez, Heather" <heather_hernan...@nps.gov> > Cc: Koha-org - List <koha@lists.katipo.co.nz> > Subject: Re: [Koha] System generated field 001 control number > Message-ID: > <CAH2zftHB59j7eHtooxjUCcjjV2xxGVkxJf3Fm1xSjzPWX_dvTA@mail. > gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Hi Heather, > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Hernandez, Heather > <heather_hernan...@nps.gov> wrote: > > > Hi, Pablo-- > > > > I'm not really sure what you're asking--we use the 001 for a unique > > bibliographic control number, which for us is the OCLC record number. > > > > We wish to have 001 as unique bibliographic control number, but our library > have nothing to do with OCLC. > > Are you saying that you wish Koha could automatically generate a unique > > control number in the 001? > > > > Yes. > > > > Would you use this differently from the Koha record number in the 999 > > $c field? > > > > Yes. In fact we already have a control number on old records because they > come from a migration, and this numbers could overlap with biblionumber > (999$c). That's why bug 9921 is not useful for us. We need on 001 a unique > record number that is not equal neither with OCLC control number nor > Koha's biblionumber. > > Cheers, > Pablo > _______________________________________________ Koha mailing list http://koha-community.org Koha@lists.katipo.co.nz https://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha
