Hi all, I'd like to address an issue that I think could limit Koha's acceptance as a viable solution in certain parts of the world - specifically the current database fields available for storing call number information. Since call numbers are so vital for a library and because there are so many different systems for assigning call numbers, I think it would be to our advantage to to make Koha as flexible as possible to work as many call number systems as possible. I think what I'm proposing might only involve changing a couple field types or adding a field or two. Since we need to write conversion scripts to move data from V1.2.3 to V2.0, wouldn't this be the best time to tweak the database fields? The issue I'm confronting is that almost every library I'm familiar with here in the USA uses call number labels on the spines of their books with four or even sometimes five lines of call number information. The second line is usually all numbers, but not always. So basically there is a need to store four or five fields worth of alpha-numeric call number information with each field containing up to 8 or 10 characters. In looking at the current fields available for call numbers in the biblioitems table, I find several are not flexible enough to store this kind of data because of their field type or length. Specifically, itemtype is varchar(4), dewey is double(8,6), subclass is char(3), and publicationyear is smallint(6). So none of those fields is suitable for storing up 8 to 10 digits of alpha-numeric call number information. Did I miss some other possible fields, or what is a library with four fields of call number information supposed to do? Ideally, I think Koha should have five fields possibly of type varchar(10) available for storing call number information. If dewey and subclass were converted to varchar, that would provide two. Would making that conversion break anything in the existing code? (I do see a number of FIXME comments already in Search.pm about dewey being a string and not a floating point number). Are there any other existing fields that could be adapted for this purpose, or would it hurt to add a couple field to the biblioitems table? What is the classification field for? Once these fields are available for storing the data, individual libraries could develope their own templates for displaying the call number information in a format that matches the spine labels on their books. I would be interested to hear if anyone else has confronted this problem and how they solved it. What is Nelsonville Library doing for their call numbers? What call number systems are used in other parts of the world and would this idea work for them? Thanks, Rob