Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Browser client dev log update / feedback request on grids
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 6:24 PM, McCanna, Terran tmcca...@georgialibraries.org wrote: Bill, The approach I'm testing now is a combination of checkbox (single select / multi-select), row click (single select), row ctrl-click (single select / multi-select), and row shift-click (batch select). The different styles seem to complement each other well and in each case the state of the checkbox (and CSS) indicate which rows are selected. Nice! That sounds like it would cover everything a user will try (and they WILL try everything...) Regarding scrolling, when we build pages that only have a single grid, we have the option of allowing the grid to fill the page. That is, there will only be one scroll bar on the page (the main scroll) and as you scroll down the page, you are scrolling through the content as well (and new content is fetched as needed). When printing this type of page, would it by nature default to printing all records unless the staff told it to only print selected pages? I'm thinking of the times when there might be hundreds or even thousands of results and staff members that will click print without limiting the pages. With paging instead of scrolling, there'd be an automatic limit on how many pages would print at once based on how many records the user chose to view at once. Indeed, we would have to create some type of artificial / configurable barrier, like only printing the visible or selected rows. Printing thousands of rows would be a bad thing. Your mention of scrolling requiring more memory raises red flags - I don't think PINES is alone in having a lot of libraries running very old/slow machines on slow connections. Granted, we're saving memory in a lot of other places with the web client, so it might be okay to use a little more memory here if it offers significantly better usability, but I'm not so sure that it would... I'd like to hear opposing viewpoints though. As would I. I'm confident we can build it to be memory efficient, it will just take a little more poking and prodding to be sure. Thanks for putting so much thought into these details and giving the rest of us insight into your findings! Thanks for the feedback. -b -- Bill Erickson | Senior Software Developer | phone: 877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: ber...@esilibrary.com | web: http://esilibrary.com | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Browser client dev log update / feedback
I am on Jury Duty April 1 - April 3; if you need assistance during this period contact Admin. Asst. Zoe Daniel at zdan...@westfordma.gov.
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 2.6 RC Available for Testing [RM2.6]
Hello all, I am happy to announce that a build of the 2.6 release candidate is now available in the preview area: http://evergreen-ils.org/downloads/previews/Evergreen-ILS-2.6-rc1.tar.gz http://evergreen-ils.org/downloads/previews/Evergreen-ILS-2.6-rc1.tar.gz.md5 http://evergreen-ils.org/downloads/previews/evergreen-client-2.6-rc1_i686.tar.bz2 http://evergreen-ils.org/downloads/previews/evergreen-client-2.6-rc1_i686.tar.bz2.md5 http://evergreen-ils.org/downloads/previews/evergreen-client-2.6-rc1_x86_64.tar.bz2 http://evergreen-ils.org/downloads/previews/evergreen-client-2.6-rc1_x86_64.tar.bz2.md5 http://evergreen-ils.org/downloads/previews/evergreen-setup-2.6-rc1.exe http://evergreen-ils.org/downloads/previews/evergreen-setup-2.6-rc1.exe.md5 http://evergreen-ils.org/downloads/previews/ChangeLog-2.5.3-2.6-rc1 You can also preview the release notes build here: http://evergreen-ils.org/downloads/previews/RELEASE_NOTES_2_6.html While all testing and feedback is appreciated, I am particularly interested in anyone able to test the upgrade script, especially on a production-like DB. Thanks, Dan Daniel Wells Library Programmer/Analyst Hekman Library, Calvin College 616.526.7133
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Anyone using Custom Org Unit Tree
Hi all, We are facing the following scenario. We wonder whether the Custom Org Unit Tree will help. SYS1 and SYS2 do not share their collections, meaning no holds allowed on each other. Now BRA1 from SYS1 wants to share its collection with all branches of SYS2, which means collection of BRA1 should show up when a search is scoped to SYS2. For some reason, it is not desired to move BRA1 to SYS2 on the org unit tree. We tried the Custom Org Unit Tree. We made BRA1 under SYS2, same as the other branches in SYS2. BRA1 showed up on the OPAC as a branch in the search location list (and the hold pickup library list). But it seems for 'display' only. When a search is scoped to SYS2, titles, of which only BRA1 has copies, are not returned on the result list. We also tried to hide an org unit from the Custom Tree, but its holdings keep showing up on the holdings grid. I wonder anyone is using the Custom Org Unit Tree. Can you shed some light on how it works? Other issues on my radar includes how custom tree interacts with the Org Unit Hiding Depth on the Library Settings Editor, and the OUs in circ_ and hold_matrix_matchpoints. We do not use Strict OU matches. Thank you Tina Ji 1-888-848-9250 Trainer/Help Desk Specialist BC Libraries Cooperative/Sitka
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Anyone using Custom Org Unit Tree
We use custom org unit trees but solely for the purpose of display in the OPAC so that we can have a straight alphabetical list (otherwise our region information would showup). I did not think custom org trees affected holds policies or circ polices. Tim Spindler Manager of Library Applications. C/W MARS On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Tina Ji (Project Sitka) t...@sitka.bclibraries.ca wrote: Hi all, We are facing the following scenario. We wonder whether the Custom Org Unit Tree will help. SYS1 and SYS2 do not share their collections, meaning no holds allowed on each other. Now BRA1 from SYS1 wants to share its collection with all branches of SYS2, which means collection of BRA1 should show up when a search is scoped to SYS2. For some reason, it is not desired to move BRA1 to SYS2 on the org unit tree. We tried the Custom Org Unit Tree. We made BRA1 under SYS2, same as the other branches in SYS2. BRA1 showed up on the OPAC as a branch in the search location list (and the hold pickup library list). But it seems for 'display' only. When a search is scoped to SYS2, titles, of which only BRA1 has copies, are not returned on the result list. We also tried to hide an org unit from the Custom Tree, but its holdings keep showing up on the holdings grid. I wonder anyone is using the Custom Org Unit Tree. Can you shed some light on how it works? Other issues on my radar includes how custom tree interacts with the Org Unit Hiding Depth on the Library Settings Editor, and the OUs in circ_ and hold_matrix_matchpoints. We do not use Strict OU matches. Thank you Tina Ji 1-888-848-9250 Trainer/Help Desk Specialist BC Libraries Cooperative/Sitka -- Tim Spindler tjspind...@gmail.com *P** Go Green - **Save a tree! Please don't print this e-mail unless it's really necessary.*
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Anyone using Custom Org Unit Tree
Hi Tina, MassLNC funded the development for the custom org unit tree, so I can give you some background on the use cases behind the development. It essentially was created for display purposes as we didn't like the way systems and branches were displaying in the org unit selector. You're right, the custom org tree won't affect the way search results are retrieved. For our use cases, we didn't need a change in the retrieval of search results. Its only purpose was to allow us to reorder the org units in the selector, and therefore it doesn't play into circ/holds policies either. I'm not quite sure how it interacts with org unit hiding depth. We had two specific use cases we were trying to address: - Removal of the system level in the org unit dropdown: In Massachusetts, we have very few multi-branch libraries, so the default display with a branch appearing under a system did not work well for us. Users didn't understand what the difference was between the two different selections (and there really wasn't a difference) and it added needless clutter to the interface. For the most part, this problem was solved by the Org Units Do Not Inherit Visibility global flag (added at the same time as the custom org trees) since it allowed us to hide the system level while keeping branches visible. However, those hidden system-level org units do display in the staff client, and I don't think everyone liked that, so the custom org tree provides another means of hiding that system level in both the public and staff view. - As Tim mentioned in his e-mail, C/W MARS has an additional level in their org hierarchy. Consortium Region System Branch. They needed to create this additional regional level due to the way the delivery sorting happens in our state. They wanted holds to be filled within a region before moving on to the rest of the consortium. However, we didn't want libraries to display in the OPAC within each region. The custom org tree allowed C/W MARS to interfile all of their libraries into one big alphabetical dropdown list. - Another use I've seen of the custom org tree is, in cases where we do have multibranch systems, we might want the main library to display above the other branches, even if it doesn't come first alphabetically. We can make the main library appear out of order using the custom org tree. I hope this helps! Kathy Kathy Lussier Project Coordinator Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative (508) 343-0128 kluss...@masslnc.org Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier On 4/1/2014 3:17 PM, Tina Ji (Project Sitka) wrote: Hi all, We are facing the following scenario. We wonder whether the Custom Org Unit Tree will help. SYS1 and SYS2 do not share their collections, meaning no holds allowed on each other. Now BRA1 from SYS1 wants to share its collection with all branches of SYS2, which means collection of BRA1 should show up when a search is scoped to SYS2. For some reason, it is not desired to move BRA1 to SYS2 on the org unit tree. We tried the Custom Org Unit Tree. We made BRA1 under SYS2, same as the other branches in SYS2. BRA1 showed up on the OPAC as a branch in the search location list (and the hold pickup library list). But it seems for 'display' only. When a search is scoped to SYS2, titles, of which only BRA1 has copies, are not returned on the result list. We also tried to hide an org unit from the Custom Tree, but its holdings keep showing up on the holdings grid. I wonder anyone is using the Custom Org Unit Tree. Can you shed some light on how it works? Other issues on my radar includes how custom tree interacts with the Org Unit Hiding Depth on the Library Settings Editor, and the OUs in circ_ and hold_matrix_matchpoints. We do not use Strict OU matches. Thank you Tina Ji 1-888-848-9250 Trainer/Help Desk Specialist BC Libraries Cooperative/Sitka
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Anyone using Custom Org Unit Tree
Thanks so much, Kathy Tim. It's very helpful. I see the value that the custom OU tree can bring to us: re-ordering the OUs. I will look for a solution to my issue somewhere else. :) Thanks again Tina Quoting Kathy Lussier kluss...@masslnc.org: Hi Tina, MassLNC funded the development for the custom org unit tree, so I can give you some background on the use cases behind the development. It essentially was created for display purposes as we didn't like the way systems and branches were displaying in the org unit selector. You're right, the custom org tree won't affect the way search results are retrieved. For our use cases, we didn't need a change in the retrieval of search results. Its only purpose was to allow us to reorder the org units in the selector, and therefore it doesn't play into circ/holds policies either. I'm not quite sure how it interacts with org unit hiding depth. We had two specific use cases we were trying to address: - Removal of the system level in the org unit dropdown: In Massachusetts, we have very few multi-branch libraries, so the default display with a branch appearing under a system did not work well for us. Users didn't understand what the difference was between the two different selections (and there really wasn't a difference) and it added needless clutter to the interface. For the most part, this problem was solved by the Org Units Do Not Inherit Visibility global flag (added at the same time as the custom org trees) since it allowed us to hide the system level while keeping branches visible. However, those hidden system-level org units do display in the staff client, and I don't think everyone liked that, so the custom org tree provides another means of hiding that system level in both the public and staff view. - As Tim mentioned in his e-mail, C/W MARS has an additional level in their org hierarchy. Consortium Region System Branch. They needed to create this additional regional level due to the way the delivery sorting happens in our state. They wanted holds to be filled within a region before moving on to the rest of the consortium. However, we didn't want libraries to display in the OPAC within each region. The custom org tree allowed C/W MARS to interfile all of their libraries into one big alphabetical dropdown list. - Another use I've seen of the custom org tree is, in cases where we do have multibranch systems, we might want the main library to display above the other branches, even if it doesn't come first alphabetically. We can make the main library appear out of order using the custom org tree. I hope this helps! Kathy Kathy Lussier Project Coordinator Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative (508) 343-0128 kluss...@masslnc.org Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier Tina Ji 1-888-848-9250 Trainer/Help Desk Specialist BC Libraries Cooperative/Sitka
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Notification is library is last owning on a held item?
Hi folks, Does anyone know, is there a feature in Evergreen, whether currently in place or in development, that would notify a library is it's the last owning library that carries a particular held item? We have a large consortium, 70+ libraries, and patrons can place holds on pretty much any member library's items. It would be really helpful if there could be some sort of alert if a library's that's the last holding one marks a held item missing. That way, the patron's home library could notify him/her that they're unable to get the item through the consortium. I hope that my question makes sense! Cheers! Buzzy Library Director Hood River County Library District 502 State Street Hood River, Oregon 97031 541-387-7062 http://hoodriverlibrary.org
