Thanks for the tip. Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to have worked. I got together with the cataloger today and tried changing the settings as you described (e.g. changed the visibility of 785 subfield t to 0 for both the default and serials templates) but it doesn't seem to have any effect on 785 t being visible for new records or old records that we're trying to edit. (The actual records use the default template but I tried changing the serials template too, just in case.) When I go back to the screens where I made the change, it displays as 0, so it *was* correctly saved. Could something else be going on? On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Ian Walls <ian.walls@bywatersolutions.com>wrote:
Emily,
All the subfields in 785 are by default 'hidden'. You can go into the Default Framework, search for 785, click Subfields, then select any one of the subfields to edit The hidden value is under "display more constraints". It looks like the bulk of them are set to -6, which marks it as hidden in the Editor, but not Collapsed if it's populated.
The guide to 'hidden' values can be found in the [?] help link in the upper right corner, or right here: hidden
- allows you to select from 19 possible visibility conditions, 17 of which are implemented. They are the following: - -9 => Future use - -8 => Flag - -7 => OPAC !Intranet !Editor Collapsed - -6 => OPAC Intranet !Editor !Collapsed - -5 => OPAC Intranet !Editor Collapsed - -4 => OPAC !Intranet !Editor !Collapsed - -3 => OPAC !Intranet Editor Collapsed - -2 => OPAC !Intranet Editor !Collapsed - -1 => OPAC Intranet Editor Collapsed - 0 => OPAC Intranet Editor !Collapsed - 1 => !OPAC Intranet Editor Collapsed - 2 => !OPAC !Intranet Editor !Collapsed - 3 => !OPAC !Intranet Editor Collapsed - 4 => !OPAC Intranet Editor !Collapsed - 5 => !OPAC !Intranet !Editor Collapsed - 6 => !OPAC Intranet !Editor !Collapsed - 7 => !OPAC Intranet !Editor Collapsed - 8 => !OPAC !Intranet !Editor !Collapsed - 9 => Future use - ( ! means 'not visible' or in the case of Collapsed 'not Collapsed')
Setting it to 0 would be the most visible, but you can play with your other options.
Hope this helps!
-Ian
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 1:37 PM, bradamant <emily.morton.owens@gmail.com>wrote:
Our cataloger has encountered a problem in Koha (3.0200004) where a field appears in the MARC Bibliographic Framework but does not appear when adding new biblios or editing existing biblios. However, it does appear if you import a new record that happens to contain it.
Here's what the cataloger is seeing: - You need to update a bib record to include a field we didn’t previously use on that record. (Your example is a 785 field to record a succeeding entry for a journal that changed title, right?) - Our template appears to contain this field (here: /koha/admin/marctagstructure.pl). The template also passes the MARC framework test (/koha/admin/checkmarc.pl). But when you view the record of a specific/actual item, the field doesn’t appear. - However, you can import a new bib record that has a 785 and that info will appear correctly and you could edit it (if for some reason you needed to). - You could solve the problem (of this specific journal changing its title) by importing a new bib record for the item that already has a 785 field, but then you’d have to reattach all the existing items to the new bib record which doesn’t make sense and would take a long time.
Does anyone have insight into what could be going on here? It seems like something is out of sync. Thanks.
Emily
-- View this message in context: http://koha.1045719.n5.nabble.com/Field-missing-from-MARC-template-tp4306118... Sent from the Koha - Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Koha mailing list http://koha-community.org Koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha
-- Ian Walls Lead Development Specialist ByWater Solutions ALA Booth 732 Phone # (888) 900-8944 http://bywatersolutions.com ian.walls@bywatersolutions.com Twitter: @sekjal