[Koha] Creative re-purposing of major fields

[hansbkk at gmail.com]

Sorry to be talking to myself here, but in doing some more extensive
googling, I came across this:
http://library-matters.blogspot.com/2009/03/dont-be-afraid-of-using-lots-of-item.html

Thanks Joann!

And this: http://koha.org/documentation/manual/3.0/cataloging/item-fields-data-migration

These answered some of my questions - summarizing for future googlers
(list members please correct me if this is wrong)

----------------------
Administrator can set an option to allow using either Collection or
Item type for the OPAC's Advanced search, but not both (enhancement
request! 8-)

Item type does determine circulation rules in effect for an item, but
its usage doesn't need to be limited to this function - can have 50
item types covered by four rules.

Shelving location is not available for advanced search.

----------------------
The question remains on whether the Collection and/or Shelving
location can be assigned to items completely independently of Home
branch - I realize the latter especially is "supposed to be"
subsidiary to Branch, but since I don't need to use it for that
function, and it displays in the OPAC, can I use it for something like
Age appropriateness across locations?


On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 6:30 PM,  <hansbkk at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm currently using Koha to catalog a collection of mostly non-book resources
> at my school, many of which are stored on physical DVDs and/or online available
> for download.
>
> I'm thinking of re-purposing some of Koha's major data fields where their usual
> meaning isn't all that relevant to this project. For example, I plan to create
> my call numbers so they are sufficient to identify the physical location within
> a given branch.  This will free up "Collection" and "Shelf Location" for other,
> more relevant classifications.
>
> Before I start mapping this out, I first want to get feedback that I'm not way
> off-track thinking this way. First question:
>
> I believe that the original intention was a hierarchy for physical location:
>  Home branch -->  Collection --> Shelving location --> Call number
>
> If I re-purpose these fields so that e.g. Collection is used for distinguishing
> between "Disc-Data" vs "Disc-Video" vs "Disc-Mixed", is their any remnant of the
> above original hierarchy that will cause trouble? Is Collection completely
> independent of Branch in the database and UI design, or is there some
> enforcement of one Collection being "contained" within a Branch?
>
> Same question of course with Shelving location relative to both Collection and
> Branch - say I used this field to map to "Age Appropriateness" (Adult-only,
> Young adult, Juvenile, Early learners). Note that the Age factor is a biblio
> level one, while many biblios will have both a Data and a Video disc - a member
> may want to borrow only one or both.