That was my misunderstanding, so glad for the clarification. Rather ask now than after it's been developed...
Then my pretend-it's-magic request -- when an in-transit item is re-directed, have a message pop up (with twenty seven eight-by-ten color glossy pictures with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one) that explains that the original hold was cancelled because a local hold was found to fill it. Elaine J. Elaine Hardy PINES Bibliographic Projects and Metadata Manager Georgia Public Library Service, A Unit of the University System of Georgia 1800 Century Place, Suite 150 Atlanta, Ga. 30345-4304 404.235-7128 404.235-7201, fax [email protected] www.georgialibraries.org http://www.georgialibraries.org/pines/ -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Thomas Berezansky Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 8:34 AM To: Evergreen Discussion Group Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Fulfillment Prioritization I think you have the "hijack" backwards. You are assuming that an in transit hold will be hijacked and pulled back to the home library. In fact, the only "hijacked" transits will be "Patron A has a hold with a copy in transit, we will ignore the in transit copy and put this copy we are checking in on the shelf for them *right now* instead, pushing the transiting copy off of the hold". No patron will get a copy that was going to a different patron as a result. It looks like most of your other concerns on this stem from that initial misunderstanding, though you are correct that things may go right back into transit when they show up. That is no different than if a hold is canceled while in transit, though. Thomas Berezansky Merrimack Valley Library Consortium
