Tümer Garip a écrit :
Hi all, I think the framework idea was quite fine but has been taken to the extreme. If frame works were used just as subsets of the default just to allow the cataloger to see the necessary fields depending on what they are cataloguing than its a wonderful idea. But the way it is being used is messing everything up. I suggest we keep the frameworks but change the usability to just closing and opening fields for editor purposes. Apart from that everything should be mapped in the default framework otherwise nobody will be able to search anything. Even with the new koha_attr table. That one i designed it so that it only looks in the default framewok if ever it need to lookup, otherwise god knows who wants to store where.
So just simply remove the kohafield mapping from child frameworks and we can go ahead designing this new API. We may run into more problems later on if we just map title,author and itemtype when somebody comes who wants some other unusual field displayed on their serachresult templates later on.
Well thats another cent of idea
Cheers Tumer
Well, then it is only a display problem... With a TMPL_IF if could be solved... ;) But what if user would like to : 1) get some default values for issues and some other with monographies (for instance) ? 2) get different lists to pick up values depending on the framework used ? I came across the question and said : Koha doesnot do that. Friendly yours. -- Henri-Damien LAURENT