Reply inline: On Thu, November 11, 2010 18:57, Magnus Enger wrote:
On 11 November 2010 18:35, MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
Magnus Enger wrote:
On 11 November 2010 15:52, MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
I decided not to do that because RFCs using only the template aren't actually *in* the category page, but are only shown when you click "What links here" in the left navigation on the category page (which doesn't really exist for Serials yet, as you'll notice).
Hm, wouldn't it be better if they were in the category? I can't quite see why you would want to link to the category but not put the RFC in it?
I didn't know how to do that from the template. I've given it a go as you describe at the same time as adding chris_n's voting note.
That looks good to me, e.g.: http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Add_support_for_NORMARC And I have created Category:Cataloguing: http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Category:Cataloguing
But I still think it would be a good idea to specify that this Cataloguing-category is for Cataloguing RFCs... Any thoughts on that?
In MediaWiki categories need appropriate names to avoid semantic confusion and ensure that they are used in an appropriate way. If you intend for a category to be used only for RFCs related to cataloguing, give the category an appropriate name such as 'cataloguing RFCs'. Category parent / child relationships will not save you from ambiguity and if merely using 'Cataloguing' as a category name for RFCs relating to cataloguing. In using such a general name you will have taken a perfectly good category name which most people will want to use for cataloguing generally. The actual structure of categories is flat allowing them to have multiple parent/child relationships to other categories which does not provide for some particular use unless identified in the name. [...] Thomas Dukleth Agogme 109 E 9th Street, 3D New York, NY 10003 USA http://www.agogme.com +1 212-674-3783