[Koha] Budgets in 3.2 Acquisitions
nengard at gmail.com
Thu Feb 4 06:02:32 NZDT 2010
That is how it used to be - but we do have another level - a
'sub-budget' -- I do think Budget & then Fund makes sense since that
was the language used before - but where does the 'sub-budget' go -
does it become a 'sub-fund'?
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Lenora Oftedahl <OFTL at critfc.org> wrote:
> What about Budget for the entire monetary mass a library has to spend.
> Fund for each section of the budget?
> Or account?
> Just tossing ideas of words I vaguely remember from acquisitions class and previous positions
> Lenora A. Oftedahl
> StreamNet Regional Librarian
> Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission
> From: Galen Charlton <gmcharlt at gmail.com>
> To: Garry Collum <gcollum at gmail.com>
> CC: "koha at lists.katipo.co.nz" <koha at lists.katipo.co.nz>
> Date: 2/3/2010 8:55 AM
> Subject: Re: [Koha] Budgets in 3.2 Acquisitions
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Garry Collum <gcollum at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I talked with our Acquisition's Librarian. She thought that both
>> 'root' and 'source' are programmer's terms. 'Source' is better than
>> 'root.' She preferred 'Main' or 'Material's Budget.'
> I agree that 'root' and 'source', both of which refer to the tree
> structure of the budgets, could be viewed as programmers' terms, but
> 'Materials Budget' seems a little too book-centric - i.e., a source
> budget could in fact be a budget for materials, but a top-level budget
> could also be for electronic databases licensing.
> That said, either "Source Budget" or "Main Budget" works for me,
> though the latter only as long as there's no confusion caused by the
> fact that you could have multiple "main" budgets.
> Galen Charlton
> gmcharlt at gmail.com
> Koha mailing list
> Koha at lists.katipo.co.nz
More information about the Koha