Re: [Koha-devel] Holdings and MARC Frameworks

[Joshua M. Ferraro]

----- "Chris Cormack" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > How about for frameworks other than default, you can't link to 
> > any items fields. And for any functions that check for mappings to
> > items tables, they only pull from default framework.
> > 
> > The alternative is what we have now in rel_2_2, where you can have
> > one framework for BOOKS, with items.barcode linked to 952$p, then
> > you can go and create another framework for PERI, with
> items.barcode
> > linked to 952$b. And I'm pretty sure we haven't coded carefully
> > enough in rel_2_2 for those to both work all the time ... and in 
> > Zebra, it won't work at all because you'd have to define a new
> > entry in record.abs for each of those frameworks entries. Hope that
> > clarifies.
> > 
> Hmm not really :-)
> 
> So only things who use the default framework can have items?
> 
> Im more wondering how it would work from the users point of view. IE,
> is 
> it useful to have frameworks that cant have items?
> Taking your example above with a framework for BOOKS and one for PERI.
> How would this work with only default framework having items ... is it
> like I was saying, you use the BOOKS framework for the bibliographic 
> data, then when you go to enter item information it changes to the 
> default framework?
Yep, that's the idea. You'd want to revert to the default framework
whenever you went to edit items. I guess the limitation this would
put on you is that you couldn't have more than one framework for 
items, but the alternative is the possibility that you'd have 
conflicts ... I dunno, maybe its 6 to one, half dozen to the other,
what do you think?

-- 
Joshua Ferraro                       SUPPORT FOR OPEN-SOURCE SOFTWARE
President, Technology       migration, training, maintenance, support
LibLime                                Featuring Koha Open-Source ILS
address@hidden |Full Demos at http://liblime.com/koha |1(888)KohaILS