Hi all: For those not following along at http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=10662, weve recently started talking about the possibility of adding a metadata table to Koha. The basic schema I have in mind would be something like: metadata.id, metadata.record_id, metadata.scheme, metadata.qualifier, metadata.value. The row would look like: 1, 1, marc21, 001, 123456789 It might also be necessary to store metadata.record_type so as to know where metadata.record_id points. This obviously has a lot of disadvantages redundant data between metadata rows, no database cascades via foreign keys, etc. However, it might be necessary in the short-term as a temporary measure. Of course, adding yet another place to store metadata might not seem like a great idea. We already store metadata in biblioitems.marcxml (and biblioitems.marc), Zebra, and other biblio/biblioitems/items relational database fields. Do we really need a new place to worry about data? That said, if were ever going to move away from MARC as the internal metadata format, we need to start transitioning to something new. Ive noticed this metadata table model in DSpace and other library systems, and it seems to work reasonable well. I dont know if wed break down the whole record into this structure, or if wed just break down certain fields as defined by a configuration file. In the short term, Id like to use something like this to access a records 001 without going to Zebra, which can be slow to update. I need to be able to query a record using the 001 as soon as its added to the database, and I cant necessarily get that from Zebra. I also need to be able to query a record, even if Zebra is down. Failing the metadata table idea, Im not sure how else wed expose the 001 and any number of other fields without using Zebra. We store the 020 and 022 in biblioitems.isbn and biblioitems.issn, but were putting multiple values in a single field, and thats not so great for searching. We might also want to add the 035 to the fields were searching, so I dont think just adding to the biblio or biblioitems tables will really do especially since were trying to move away from MARC. Anyway, please let me know your thoughts. David Cook Systems Librarian Prosentient Systems 72/330 Wattle St, Ultimo, NSW 2007