Dear Jan and all At 15.51 16/07/2010, BERNON Jean wrote:
Fixing a common use of 995 tag is a good idea but uneasy to do. Local fields are... local. I am not sure that there is ONE French setup for 995. Here is the University Lyon 3 setup for 995, very different from yours.
in fact Koha is very flexible on this problem. All templates don't use marc fields/subfileds but the SQL coloums. So, with the liking between Koha and MySQL you can use the fields/subfileds that you want, for the templates. This is not tha same on XSLT views and indexes [i use code of 3.2, because in fact you are on a 3.2 as I have undestand from BibLibre] XSLT is based on marc subfield. So if you have Biblionumber and biblioitemnumber are in 999, you have also a personal version of xslt/UNIMARCslim2OPACDetail.xsl and xslt/UNIMARCslim2OPACResults.xsl. The standard version use 090 with this instruction: <xsl:variable name="biblionumber" select="marc:datafield[@tag=090]/marc:subfield[@code='a']"/> The standard indexes are 995$2 lost,lost:n,item 995$a homebranch,Host-item,item 995$b homebranch,Host-item,item 995$c holdingbranch,Record-Source,item 995$d holdingbranch,Record-Source,item 995$e location,item 995$f barcode,item 995$h ccode,item 995$j LC-card-number:s,item 995$k Call-Number,Local-Classification,lcn,Call-Number:p,Local-Classification:p,lcn:p,item 995$s popularity:n,popularity:s,item 995$n onloan:d,onloan:n,onloan:s,onloan:w,item 995$u Note,Note:p,item Your defintion of 995$2 and 995$s are not coherent with the standard indexes
2 Price -> items.price s CallNumSource -> items.cn_source
In fact is not a problem you have a different configuration, you need only to know it. In fact my proposal doesn't want to be used as is. I want only to setup a minumun tha has as many useful default as possible. Others opinions on the topic ? Cheers Zeno Tajoli Zeno Tajoli CILEA - Segrate (MI) tajoliAT_SPAM_no_prendiATcilea.it (Indirizzo mascherato anti-spam; sostituisci quanto tra AT con @)