[Koha-devel] Availability in Koha Was: Re: [Koha-patches] [PATCH 2/2] Fixes bug 4481: Limit to Available filters out many available items.
Ian Walls
ian.walls at bywatersolutions.com
Thu May 20 02:38:11 CEST 2010
Liz,
I've been thinking about that for a while now. I'd like to see a partially
user-configurable "status" setting, that includes some core status (checked
out, in transit, on order, etc.), as well as the ability to define new
ones. Status would be a code, a staff client name, an OPAC name, and a
series of toggles indicated what that status means. This would include
things like:
Can Be Checked Out
Can Be Reserved
Can Be Used in the library (reference)
Can Be Accessed Remotely (for online resources)
etc. etc.
This list would be finite, and comprised of the various actions that can be
done on an item depending on it's nature. The list above is just what I can
remember right now after a long day.
The tricky parts are of course automatically changing between these status
on events from the system (which requires that the code knows that certain
values will be in the database; perhaps add some kind of 'lock' field to
prevent GUI users from accidentally deleting system-dependent data?), and
what to do about Zebra indexing for this field. But it would provide a much
clearer definition of what "available" is, and would also make some other
external systems happier.
What do others think of this? Am I missing a key issue that would prevent
this from working?
Cheers,
-Ian
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Liz Rea <lrea at nekls.org> wrote:
> While we're talking about availability, thought I'd put this out there.
>
> Our statewide ILL system would really appreciate a single field for
> availability on items: a "yes, you can have that for ILL" or "No, I'm sorry,
> that item is lost, checked out, out for repair, local use only, In transit,
> or any one of the plethora of other reasons why this item isn't available."
>
> The statewide system currently uses AutoGraphics, which can only check one
> field. We are currently having them check the 952$q. Here's a brief rundown
> from the coordinator of the statewide ILL:
>
> "Since Koha puts status information into different subfields (rather than
> putting different statuses in the same subfield), we had to pick on subfield
> to look at. The KEGGr group decided that the best subfield to use was the
> 952$q. When an item is checked out, the date due appears in that subfield
> and AGent marks it as Not Available; if the $q is missing, the item is
> presumed available. My understanding is that other statuses such as Lost or
> In Transit appear in different subfields.
>
> Other Z target catalogs use a single subfield for status information, so
> when we look in the 852$s (for example), we might see On Shelf, or Checked
> Out, or Lost, or Mending, etc. Since there's just a single place to look, we
> can determine all of the different statuses and route requests accordingly."
>
> I wanted to make sure that an authoritative availability field is added if
> availability is revamped. It would make our life a whole lot easier.
>
> Liz Rea
> NEKLS
>
> On May 19, 2010, at 7:53 AM, Ian Walls wrote:
>
> Thanks! I was sure there was an explanation for why the code was originally
> commented out, and a more comprehensive system for determining
> 'availability' is definitely called for. I had some complaints from folks
> on our end that the link wasn't working at all, and the functionality I get
> by adding those lines back in is better for them that otherwise.
>
> I'll temporarily make use of my patch for these folks until a better one is
> ready. Thanks for the update!
>
>
> -Ian
>
> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 7:08 PM, LAURENT Henri-Damien <
> henridamien.laurent at biblibre.com> wrote:
>
>> Le 19/05/2010 00:04, Ian Walls a écrit :
>> > From: Ian Walls <Ian.Walls at med.nyu.edu>
>> >
>> > ---
>> > C4/Search.pm | 25 ++++++++++++-------------
>> > 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/C4/Search.pm b/C4/Search.pm
>> > index 229ee40..e7c9c76 100644
>> > --- a/C4/Search.pm
>> > +++ b/C4/Search.pm
>> > @@ -1256,21 +1256,20 @@ sub buildQuery {
>> > my $group_OR_limits;
>> > my $availability_limit;
>> > foreach my $this_limit (@limits) {
>> > -# if ( $this_limit =~ /available/ ) {
>> > -#
>> > -## 'available' is defined as (items.onloan is NULL) and (items.itemlost
>> = 0)
>> > -## In English:
>> > -## all records not indexed in the onloan register (zebra) and all
>> records with a value of lost equal to 0
>> > -# $availability_limit .=
>> > -#"( ( allrecords,AlwaysMatches='' not onloan,AlwaysMatches='') and
>> (lost,st-numeric=0) )"; #or ( allrecords,AlwaysMatches='' not
>> lost,AlwaysMatches='')) )";
>> > -# $limit_cgi .= "&limit=available";
>> > -# $limit_desc .= "";
>> > -# }
>> > -#
>> > + if ( $this_limit =~ /available/ ) {
>> > +
>> > +# 'available' is defined as (items.onloan is NULL) and (items.itemlost
>> = 0)
>> > +# In English:
>> > +# all records not indexed in the onloan register (zebra) and all
>> records with a value of lost equal to 0
>> > + $availability_limit .=
>> > +"( ( allrecords,AlwaysMatches='' not onloan,AlwaysMatches='') and
>> (lost,st-numeric=0) )"; #or ( allrecords,AlwaysMatches='' not
>> lost,AlwaysMatches='')) )";
>> > + $limit_cgi .= "&limit=available";
>> > + $limit_desc .= "";
>> > + }
>> > +
>> > # group_OR_limits, prefixed by mc-
>> > # OR every member of the group
>> > -# elsif ( $this_limit =~ /mc/ ) {
>> > - if ( $this_limit =~ /mc/ ) {
>> > + elsif ( $this_limit =~ /mc/ ) {
>> > $group_OR_limits .= " or " if $group_OR_limits;
>> > $limit_desc .= " or " if $group_OR_limits;
>> > $group_OR_limits .= "$this_limit";
>> Hi Ian.
>> Nahuel will work on a real fix for availability.
>> Since at the moment customers are complaining (quite fairly) that
>> availability cannot be at biblio level but should rather be at item level.
>> And they are correct.
>> But When indexing elements only at biblio level, we cannot provide them
>> with the best accurate information.
>> So Nahuel already did some work on that.
>> But it need some improvement, which he will do soon.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Koha-patches mailing list
>> Koha-patches at lists.koha.org
>> http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-patches
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ian Walls
> Lead Development Specialist
> ByWater Solutions
> ALA Booth # 817
> Phone # (888) 900-8944
> http://bywatersolutions.com
> ian.walls at bywatersolutions.com
> Twitter: @sekjal
> _______________________________________________
> Koha-patches mailing list
> Koha-patches at lists.koha.org
> http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-patches
>
>
>
--
Ian Walls
Lead Development Specialist
ByWater Solutions
ALA Booth # 817
Phone # (888) 900-8944
http://bywatersolutions.com
ian.walls at bywatersolutions.com
Twitter: @sekjal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </pipermail/koha-devel/attachments/20100519/0151dfc8/attachment-0002.htm>
More information about the Koha-devel
mailing list