goobi-release team mailing list archive

[Sebastian Meyer <question217368@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Question #217368 on Goobi.Presentation changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/goobi-presentation/+question/217368

    Status: Open => Answered

Sebastian Meyer proposed the following answer:
Why do you think there is something wrong with that? Technically
everything works as expected: you are searching for "dresden" and get
all structures which contain this string in any of their indexed
metadata fields. Some of these structures are top-level structures
(according to the configuration), while others aren't. Those which are
sub-structures get aggregated under their respective top-level
structure. That's how it is supposed to work and actually does.

Goobi.Presentation recognizes "anchor" files by their record identifier.
So when indexing a volume of a multivolume work, Goobi.Presentation
iterates through its structure and indexes every linked "mptr"
reference. This way the "anchor" files get indexed, too. If there
already is a document with the same record identifier as the "anchor"
file's, the volume gets connected to this existing "anchor". This way
all volumes of a multivolume work finally have the same parent document
in Goobi.Presentation. (Actually this is a very generic thing when
indexing documents and doesn't apply only when indexing multivolume
works: in fact every single METS file is recognized by its record
identifier and reindexing just updates the already existing DB entry if
found.)

The inconsistencies in your METS files shouldn't be a problem as long as
you configure all the variants in Goobi.Presentation. Just create
separate entries for every variant of the structure elements.

-- 
You received this question notification because you are a member of
Goobi Release Management, which is an answer contact for
Goobi.Presentation.