2011/12/15 Fischer, Katrin katrin.fisc...@bsz-bw.de:
+1 from me too.
The XSLT is done so that only information in your records shows up. I don't
see why people would not want that.
+1
In an ideal world I think we would have some cool graphical tool where
each library could easily configure
+1 to displaying all standard information on the Details page. If a
library has this info in a record, but DOESN'T want it displayed, then can
either remove the info, or strip the field out with JQuery. Hopefully
'sensitive' information is not being put in MARC records...
I'm with Magnus on
Hello Paul,
in my opinion, it would be nice to have
1) an eventually huge XSLT file. It's probably easier for most
people to comment out or tweak things that are already there than to
add the extra fields they need from scratch.
2) a local XSLT file that survives updates unharmed where people
Paul,
My vote will surprise no one.
in my opinion, it would be nice to have
1) an eventually huge XSLT file. It's probably easier for most
people to comment out or tweak things that are already there than to
add the extra fields they need from scratch.
+1
The other option would quickly
* Jared Camins-Esakov (jcam...@cpbibliography.com) wrote:
Paul,
My vote will surprise no one.
in my opinion, it would be nice to have
1) an eventually huge XSLT file. It's probably easier for most
people to comment out or tweak things that are already there than to
+1 from me too.
The XSLT is done so that only information in your records shows up. I don't see
why people would not want that.
Katrin
* Jared Camins-Esakov (jcam...@cpbibliography.com) wrote:
Paul,
My vote will surprise no one.
in my opinion, it would be nice to have
