5 Aug
2008
5 Aug
'08
12:16 p.m.
>From a librarian point of view, I think that the intranet side should be different. Librarians want to see more information when searching than the general public would. I agree that the staff search results need to change - but I don't know if making it the same as the OPAC is what we need. This is what I've heard from catalogers and it's what I (as a librarian) feel as well. --- Nicole C. Engard Open Source Evangelist, LibLime (888) Koha ILS (564-2457) ext. 714 nce@liblime.com AIM/Y!/Skype: nengard http://liblime.com http://blogs.liblime.com/open-sesame/ On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 5:04 AM, Henri-Damien LAURENT <laurenthdl@alinto.com>wrote: > MJ Ray a écrit : > > Paul POULAIN <paul.poulain@free.fr> wrote: > > > >> One of our libraries bugs me to have exactly the same look the the > >> biblio summary in the list result. > >> atm, the differences I can see are : > >> - in staff, title/author are on 2 lines, in OPAC, they are on 1 line, > >> separated by 'by' > >> - in staff, publisher is after author, in OPAC it's on line 2, before > pubyer > >> > >> Is there an explanation for those 2 diffs, or can I modify the staff to > >> have exactly the same look as OPAC ? > >> > > > > I've been told that there are also differences in how the series title > > is displayed in the two interfaces. > > > > I think we should try for both interfaces to look similar, as far as > > possible, because it confuses library staff. I'm not familiar with > > the display code. Can we drive both displays from the same > > code/templates? > > > > Thanks, > > > Unfortunately, in that regard, Koha is designed to have a real > disconnection between OPAC and intranet > so having the same include would not be possible. (unless we decide to > enable links in apache configuration, which is BAD). > + it wouldnot be really efficient since OPAC's API is different from > staff's : > cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl is cgi-bin/koha/catalogue/detail.pl at staff. > We could write a translator from staff to OPAC display (there is > something like that in ISBDdetail.pl if i don't mind.) > But then there would still be the problem of template separation. > This raises also the problem of features : for instance, basket is not > provided at intranet, but is really useful also for staff members. > > Should we change and unify Koha's scripts and naming ? > > Should this be an RFC for 3.4 ? > for Koha 4.0 ? > > Any other comment ? > > -- > Henri-Damien LAURENT > _______________________________________________ > Koha-devel mailing list > Koha-devel@lists.koha.org > http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel >