Summary: | enter an 001 at acquisitions | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Koha | Reporter: | Nicole C. Engard <nengard> |
Component: | Acquisitions | Assignee: | Bugs List <koha-bugs> |
Status: | CLOSED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | P5 - low | CC: | katrin.fischer |
Version: | Main | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Change sponsored?: | --- | Patch complexity: | --- |
Documentation contact: | Documentation submission: | ||
Text to go in the release notes: | Version(s) released in: |
Description
Nicole C. Engard
2012-07-31 19:14:57 UTC
I have no objection to adding 001 to the basic bib order form, but you cannot use 001 for reliably matching OCLC#. 001 is the system control number, and can only be relied upon for records downloaded directly from OCLC. This means that any libraries that use vendor load records as part of acquisitions (a common workflow in my experience) will end up with problems when they expect matching to work. You should be using 035 for matching. In this case the librarian was asking for this because he has the OCLC number now and enters it in the 001 at the time of acquisition in his current system. So in this scenario it will be right :) But I of course do know what you mean :) With no comments or CCs on this in many years, I think it should be closed. This should work now with the possibility to define the fields shown in acq via the ACQ framework. |