Apology - sent by mistake to list. RE: Bug in Headings report - text-based and Millennium???

["Carolyn McDonald" <C dot McDonald at murdoch dot edu dot au>]

Oops - so sorry - careless sending of message. Was supposed to send to
staff member.

Carolyn


-----Original Message-----
From: innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org
[mailto:innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org] On Behalf Of Carolyn McDonald
Sent: Wednesday, 29 September 2004 8:59 AM
To: IUG INNOPAC List
Subject: RE: Bug in Headings report - text-based and Millennium???


The following is from the known issues page on csdirect - not sure if
any of this is relevant.


Blind References 

2004-09-14 

Blind references are not appearing in character-based headings reports.
They are appearing in Millennium reports. 

Cataloging/Database Maintenance 

Future patch for Millennium Silver 

Headings Report freezing 

2004-08-23 

When attempting to clear headings report file in Millennium Cataloging,
the user receives an error message: "The Headings Report database is
full, the report may be incomplete." When the user attempts to clear the
report, the screen freezes and will not let the user exit out
gracefully. The report doesn't clear and then freezes until the user
exits via task manager. 

Millennium Cataloging 

Future patch for Millennium Silver 

Near Matches Headings Report 

2004-07-16 

In the "Near Matches" headings report, the cross-reference entry (4xx
field) from the authority record sometimes displays instead of the
author or subject heading (1xx,6xx,7xx,or 8xx field) from the
bibliographic record. 

Millennium Cataloging 

Millennium Release 2005 



Carolyn


-----Original Message-----
From: innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org
[mailto:innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org] On Behalf Of Del Shiers
Sent: Tuesday, 28 September 2004 4:46 PM
To: IUG INNOPAC List
Subject: RE: Bug in Headings report - text-based and Millennium???


Hi Ross,
This is the only other bit of info that I've seen on the list so
far...If any more show up I'll forward them to you.
Cheers,

Del



-----Original Message-----
From: innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org
[mailto:innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org] On Behalf Of Barbara Kriigel
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 10:31 PM
To: IUG INNOPAC List
Subject: Bug in Headings report - text-based and Millennium???


Sorry for the long email but this is a complicated topic!

BACKGROUND:  We were a beta test site for Milcat and concentrated on
testing the headings reports because we used the text versions for 11
years.  By the last beta version of the software, the reports were in
good shape and we were consistently getting the same number of headings
reported in both versions with a few exceptions since some bugs in the
text versions had been fixed in Mil.  For example, in the text version,
if a new heading existed as a 5xx field on an authority record, the
heading would not be reported as new.  This bug has been fixed in Milcat

so some new headings are reported in Milcat that are not reported in the

text version.

WORKFLOW:  Even in the final beta version, we still occasionally saw an
entry in the first time headings report (text version) that did not
occur in Milcat so we continued to print the text version and compare it

with the Milcat version. Each Monday, we print the text reports for the
previous week's work and clear the file. Then we work on the reports in
Milcat and track discrepancies; we limit the Milcat reports to the same
time period reflected in the printed version.  In the new headings
report, we exclude bib records without a catdate.  By the end of the
week when all the reports have been checked,  we create a final report
for the time period but *include* bib records without a catdate.  We
review the report to be sure only entries without a catdate are listed
and then we delete the headings in the report.  Unlike text-mode which
clears all entries when you clear the file, if your Milcat report
doesn't include entries without a catdate, those entries will remain in
the file until you create a report that lists the headings and delete
them.

NEW BUG???:  We upgraded to the full Silver version on Aug 30 and since
then, we have had a growing number of discrepancies in the new headings
report.  We have a suspicion on how this is happening and plan to test
and report the bug this week to III.  Here is the scenario we *think* is

causing the problem:

1) We download a brief bib and order record; the bib record has no
catdate.
2)  Any associated new headings are listed in the new headings report
but we don't see them if we exclude bibs without a cat date.  We've
never chosen to look at these because we don't want to do authority work

at time of ordering.
3)  A full cataloging record overlays the brief bib.  Because the
headings were previously reported,  we think Milcat is *NOT* reporting
the headings again.  The text version does have all the entries even if
they were previously reported.  This is as it should be.  The manual
says that a record being downloaded is forced through authority control
so any unique headings should be reported even if they were reported
previously when the brief bib was downloaded.

What we want to test is whether or not the problem only occurs if both
the brief bib and full bib are loaded within the same cycle we use for
printing headings reports.  We have always run our reports weekly and so

the problem may only occur if the heading comes in twice during the same

week, once on the brief bib and once on the full bib.  As we've been
troubleshooting this problem, we ran headings reports that included bib
records without a catdate.  We noticed that if the brief and full bib
records were loaded in the same week, the new heading was listed only if

we included bibs without a catdate.  And even though the bib record now
has a catdate, it does not display in the report.  So it's as if the
system is not doing a full final check at the time the report is
created.

As we continued to troubleshoot this problem last week, it began to look

as though a unique heading on a full bib downloaded and overlaying the
brief bib is not being reported if the brief bib was created after our
Aug. 30 upgrade.  So the problem may be that the system thinks that
because it reported the new heading once, it doesn't need to report it
again. As I said, we want to run some test scenarios so we can give
better feedback to III when we report the problem.

Clear as mud, right??   I suggest you test the reports at your
institution because your workflow may impact whether or not you are
seeing all the first time headings you should.  If you do authority work

at time of order, you may not have a problem.  But if your workflow is
similar to ours, you may want to compare the reports.

Barbara Kriigel
Univ. of Michigan-Dearborn
--
This message was distributed through the Innovative Users Group INNOPAC
list Public replies:  INNOPAC at innopacusers dot org Update your subscription
options: http://innopacusers.org/mailman/listinfo/innopac

--
This message was distributed through the Innovative Users Group INNOPAC
list
Public replies:  INNOPAC at innopacusers dot org
Update your subscription options:
http://innopacusers.org/mailman/listinfo/innopac




--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---
--
This message was distributed through the Innovative Users Group INNOPAC
list
Public replies:  INNOPAC at innopacusers dot org
Update your subscription options:
http://innopacusers.org/mailman/listinfo/innopac