https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=38336
--- Comment #28 from Laurence Rault <[email protected]> --- The changes that could be made without discussion from my point of view are : - The 200$b field is no more indexed (it is now obsolete in cataloguing standards, and its MARC21 counterpart is not indexed). - The TYPEDOC authorized values category, which was used for controlling the value if itemtype at record level, is removed. - The default values for itemtype at biblio and item level are the same, controlled by itype values (document type). - In Koha.pm UNIMARC facets are fixed to be a mirror of MARC21 facets: a facet for itemtypes is created, and the facet for ccode is now based only on items. However, I think that it would be better to keep all the local data in one 099 field, instead of splitting between 099 (for the dates) and 942. This choice does not concern unimarc standard, it has no impact regarding the functionality, but a lot of Unimarc libraries now in France are using the 099. It is handy to display all the Koha data in the same place. So I think there is no need to rename field 099 to "Local dates (Koha)" For the field 099, I would propose : - 099$t : set itemtype instead of TYPEDOC For the field 942 : - 942$c : remove the kohafield link and the authorised value - 942$s : remove the kohafield link no subfield should be mandatory in this field Update the index accordingly For the 099, we could also add : 099$o : hidden in opac, linked to the YES_NO authorized value But this may be another BZ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
