goobi-release team mailing list archive

[Sebastian Meyer <question217368@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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

Sebastian Meyer proposed the following answer:
That's exactly the same way it works in Dresden. When browsing a collection you get only top-level documents (i.e. monographs, volumes, manuscripts, multi-volume works) where the volumes are aggregated under their respective multi-volume parents. When searching for something else you get top-level documents as well as sub-structures (i.e. chapters, illustrations, title pages etc.) where the sub-structures are aggregated under their respective top-level documents.
So the only difference (not only technically) is the level of aggregation. And I think this is what a user expects: When browsing a collection he would expect getting only documents, but no chapters (because a chapter isn't part of a collection, but a document is) - which is the same way an OPAC handles collections. But when searching he would expect getting hits inside the documents, too - which is why the level of aggregation changes to reflect this.

Another (technical) reason for this is the way of sorting: while a
collection list is typically sorted by the documents' title, a result
list of a search request is sorted by relevance. If the search hits
would get aggregated at the same level as the documents of a collection
list, the sorting would take place on the level of multi-volume works,
too (which obviously isn't appropriate when searching on sub-structure
level).


--
Sebastian Meyer

Referatsleiter 2.1 - Digitale Bibliothek
Abteilung 2 - Informationstechnologie

Sächsische Landesbibliothek -
Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Dresden (SLUB)
01054 Dresden

Tel.: +49 351 4677 - 206
Fax.: +49 351 4677 - 711
http://www.slub-dresden.de/

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