http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=14098 --- Comment #5 from Gaetan Boisson <gaetan.boisson@biblibre.com> ---
QUESTION: First, is that make sense to add a new field in 3 but erase the subfield in 4? This is certainly wrong.
This sounds more like a rhetoric question than a true question ;), but i agree, this doesnt make a lot of sense to me!
To support more use cases, I would like to create another action "copy and replace". [...] QUESTION: Does everybody agree with that?
I do.
Ok, That was the easy situations.
Now what should happen if we have this control sample? 245 _aThe art of computer programming _cDonald E. Knuth. 245 _aAnother title _cAnother author 300 _aA_exists _bB_exists 300 _aA_also_exists _bB_also_exists
According to me, we need more than one action to manage this. If we are copying a whole field, then it sounds rather simple (to me) to add a new field along the two existing 300, (copy in a new field) or to replace the existing one (update). I think this is already possible in the tool. If we are copying a subfield, it's tricky. We could want to - create a new field with the copied subfield (copy in a new field) (never ambiguous with the modified record) - copy it to all the existing fields (update existing fields) but some records in the batch might not have a corresponding field already, so we would need a "conservative update" (don't do anything if there is no such field already) and a "force update" (create the field if none exists already). I think i could deal with the second option being the only one if this is stated clearly. I hope this helps, i admit my ideas are a bit muddy on the topic. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.