Re: [Koha] Acquisitions Vendor addresses
Silly phone didn't reply to all. In the US they are 2 different things. Many businesses have a box at the post office for letter and bills and a physical address should you want to ship a package back to them. That said, labeling them differently shouldn't cause problems - but a librarian should answer Nicole ------Original Message------ From: Colin Campbell Sender: koha-bounces@lists.katipo.co.nz To: koha@lists.katipo.co.nz Subject: [Koha] Acquisitions Vendor addresses Sent: Nov 13, 2009 12:42 PM Hi, Acquisitions vendor addresses come in two variants "physical" and "postal" addresses. Confronted by these generates a lot of confusion in new users (A postal address is a physical address? When do we use one and not the other?) They are also stored differently in the table but presented similarly to the user in edit operations. I'm not clear what functional difference these addresses should have, but I'd like to switch to less misleading labels. Even 'address' and 'alternative address' would be an improvement. Looking to see if their any insights, opinions etc from anyone using (or looking to use) acquisitions. Colin -- Colin Campbell Chief Software Engineer, PTFS Europe Limited Content Management and Library Solutions +44 (0) 208 366 1295 (phone) +44 (0) 7759 633626 (mobile) colin.campbell@ptfs-europe.com skype: colin_campbell2 http://www.ptfs-europe.com _______________________________________________ Koha mailing list Koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
In the long run, I think it might be a good idea to allow for arbitrarily many addresses to be attached to any institution. This would separate the physical locations (like vendor PO boxes, shipping addresses, libraries branches) from the financial institutions (vendors, library Accounts Payable, etc.), and allow us to mix library financial institutions together with vendors (making consortial purchasing of resources easier to trace) Additionally, I really think that Vendor Contact should not be stored with the Vendor itself, but rather linked, again allowing for arbitrarily many contacts (each with a role). This would be extremely valuable for the development of a Koha Electronic Resources Management (ERM) system, since one often has different contacts at a company (sales, technical support, billing, etc.). Vendor contacts could then be assigned a level of permission on the system (or not), as the library deems appropriate. I have the beginnings of a proposal in the works, and I will publish it as an RFC when I'm confident it makes sense. Cheers, Ian Walls Systems Integration Librarian NYU Health Sciences Libraries 550 First Ave., New York, NY 10016 (212) 263-8687 -----Original Message----- From: koha-bounces@lists.katipo.co.nz [mailto:koha-bounces@lists.katipo.co.nz] On Behalf Of nengard@gmail.com Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 8:24 AM To: Colin Campbell; koha-bounces@lists.katipo.co.nz; koha@lists.katipo.co.nz Subject: Re: [Koha] Acquisitions Vendor addresses Silly phone didn't reply to all. In the US they are 2 different things. Many businesses have a box at the post office for letter and bills and a physical address should you want to ship a package back to them. That said, labeling them differently shouldn't cause problems - but a librarian should answer Nicole ------Original Message------ From: Colin Campbell Sender: koha-bounces@lists.katipo.co.nz To: koha@lists.katipo.co.nz Subject: [Koha] Acquisitions Vendor addresses Sent: Nov 13, 2009 12:42 PM Hi, Acquisitions vendor addresses come in two variants "physical" and "postal" addresses. Confronted by these generates a lot of confusion in new users (A postal address is a physical address? When do we use one and not the other?) They are also stored differently in the table but presented similarly to the user in edit operations. I'm not clear what functional difference these addresses should have, but I'd like to switch to less misleading labels. Even 'address' and 'alternative address' would be an improvement. Looking to see if their any insights, opinions etc from anyone using (or looking to use) acquisitions. Colin -- Colin Campbell Chief Software Engineer, PTFS Europe Limited Content Management and Library Solutions +44 (0) 208 366 1295 (phone) +44 (0) 7759 633626 (mobile) colin.campbell@ptfs-europe.com skype: colin_campbell2 http://www.ptfs-europe.com _______________________________________________ Koha mailing list Koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry _______________________________________________ Koha mailing list Koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha ------------------------------------------------------------ This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is proprietary, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender by return email and delete the original message. Please note, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The organization accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. =================================
Walls, Ian a écrit :
In the long run, I think it might be a good idea to allow for arbitrarily many addresses to be attached to any institution. This would separate the physical locations (like vendor PO boxes, shipping addresses, libraries branches) from the financial institutions (vendors, library Accounts Payable, etc.), and allow us to mix library financial institutions together with vendors (making consortial purchasing of resources easier to trace)
Additionally, I really think that Vendor Contact should not be stored with the Vendor itself, but rather linked, again allowing for arbitrarily many contacts (each with a role). This would be extremely valuable for the development of a Koha Electronic Resources Management (ERM) system, since one often has different contacts at a company (sales, technical support, billing, etc.). Vendor contacts could then be assigned a level of permission on the system (or not), as the library deems appropriate.
I have the beginnings of a proposal in the works, and I will publish it as an RFC when I'm confident it makes sense.
In the new_acq, that should be merged to main trunk as soon as galen can take care of it, you can specify the "delivery branch". It can be choosen from the branches list, and/or, a free text can be added (to specify something that is not in the branches table, or to specify an address that is not in the table at all). That's a 1st step in the direction you suggest, Ian. -- Paul POULAIN http://www.biblibre.com Expert en Logiciels Libres pour l'info-doc Tel : (33) 4 91 81 35 08
participants (3)
-
nengard＠gmail.com -
Paul Poulain -
Walls, Ian