[Koha] Re: OPAC displays

[Rachel Hamilton-Williams]

hi

> The OPAC display described here is very much the way the "original"
> (pre-MARC) Koha displayed search results.  Proof once again that Chris and
> Katipo were ahead of their time!

Yep that is how the original Koha works (1.2.3) there is one biblio, 
with several groups, and then items. (Stupid names, but there ya go :-)

I'm pretty attached to it as a model.

Cheers
Rachel





> Stephen
> 
> BWS Johnson said:
> 
>>Salvete!
>>
>>There's an interesting thread on the American Government Documents
>>listserv right now on OPAC displays, and I figured it might cause
>>interesting discussion here. I have forwarded one of the messages below.
>>I am aware that any change to the OPAC would probably involve an awful
>>lot of work, and I try very hard not to beg and plead for anything I'm
>>not paying for, so please don't take this as an immediate request for
>>implementation, but rather something to gnaw on as we all try and figure
>>out what configuration suits our patrons.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Brooke @ Hinsdale MA
>>
>>I am not a cataloger.
>>
>>But I'm intrigued by the interplay between the (very important) issue
>>of OPAC display that Barbie focused in on and on the draft document's
>>question about FRBR-related consequences of multiple records. It seems
>>to me that describing each item or instance (I don't remember the
>>exact FRBR nomenclature) makes sense, provided that those records can
>>be grouped into a work-level record for display so that (in my
>>understanding) we would get one hit for Statistical Abstract of the
>>United States with four or five instance records hanging off of it,
>>one each for web, cd, micro, print and (locally for us) one for a
>>commercial reprint and several for commercial online versions.
>>
>>My patrons would love to find ONE record that describes "The Starr
>>Report" or "9/11 Commission Report" and includes a list of all the
>>instances of that work, regardless of format (or publisher).
>>Similarly, if I had one "work" record to display for Code of Federal
>>Regulations that somehow had my print, fiche and electronic holdings
>>attached to it, swell.
>>
>>I don't know what FRBR-type displays will require -- it seems like
>>separate records per format -- but workflow issues aside, eventually
>>getting all the instances of a work grouped into one display
>>(regardless of how man records underlie the display) would be my ideal
>>OPAC. As far as I know, our ILS (III) won't do this, at least not yet.
>>If Aleph handles FRBR-ized display, cool.
>>
>>(I do agree with Barbie that GPO cataloger time is valuable, so
>>lower-level records for other formats makes sense to me, as long as
>>one format gets the full treatment.)
>>
>>I'd love to spend some time at Spring FDLP discussing this.
>>Scott
>>
> 
> 
>