[Koha-bugs] [Bug 25221] Imported records are not checked for accuracy
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=25221 David Cook changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dc...@prosentient.com.au -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org 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/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 25221] Imported records are not checked for accuracy
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=25221 Katrin Fischer changed: What|Removed |Added Version|19.11 |master -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org 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/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 25221] Imported records are not checked for accuracy
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=25221 --- Comment #2 from Christopher Brannon --- (In reply to Martin Renvoize from comment #1) > I like the idea of a check for accuracy and clear reporting, but a hard > quarantine would need to be optional in my opinion. I think optional is a good idea. > I know of catalogues where they import hundreds, if not thousands of > records, for electronic holdings regularly and requiring a manual > intervention step for each record could prove detrimental. Also, how would > Union Catalogues work? I am unfamiliar with the term of Union Catalog. If this refers to a shared catalog with many libraries, such as we do with our consortium, then I suppose if we went with an optional setting, the setting could be for specific libraries, all libraries, or none. Quarantine for import could also have an option for an authorized override, but if an override is in place, what's the point of having a quarantine at all? Perhaps the quarantine could have options. A more sophisticated quarantine system could allow you to quarantine certain types of issues, and only flag others. Quarantine the issues that can cause issues or errors, and flag the record for any others that have not been reviewed? Then have an alert on the home page of bibs that need to be reviewed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org 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/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 25221] Imported records are not checked for accuracy
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=25221 Martin Renvoize changed: What|Removed |Added CC||martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe ||.com --- Comment #1 from Martin Renvoize --- I like the idea of a check for accuracy and clear reporting, but a hard quarantine would need to be optional in my opinion. I know of catalogues where they import hundreds, if not thousands of records, for electronic holdings regularly and requiring a manual intervention step for each record could prove detrimental. Also, how would Union Catalogues work? It would certainly need to act like a filter rather than a hard requirement for all. I do like the idea though. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org 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/
