The 518 and 599 are 2 examples of notes fields that show in the OPAC and not the staff client. All note fields should show in the staff client.
I don't see 599 included in any of the default frameworks, so I'm not surprised it's not configured to display. However, I do see 518 showing in the staff client, under the "Descriptions" tab. Is this not what you were looking for?
Hmm, okay let me take a look. Another is the 541 that was mentioned. In short are all 5xx fields showing on staff client like they are on the OPAC?
I edit a record using the default framework and added data to all the 5xx fields for testing purposes. I viewed the record in the OPAC and staff client and found that the staff client showed more data (as I suspect it should). The data all appeared under the descriptions tabs. ---------------- | Staff | OPAC | ---------------- | 500 | 500 | | 501 | 501 | | 502 | 502 | | 505 | 505 | | 508 | 508 | | 511 | 511 | | 518 | 518 | | 520 | 520 | | 521 | 521 | | 522 | 522 | | 524 | 524 | | 526 | 526 | | 530 | 530 | | 533 | 533 | | 538 | 538 | | 541 | 541 | | 546 | 546 | | 555 | 555 | | 556 | 556 | | 562 | 562 | | 563 | | | 583 | | | 585 | | | 586 | | ----------------
Actually that's wrong, all the same notes fields show up in both. The data is returned by exactly the same function in both OPAC and staff client, which simply grabs everything in the 5xx range. It's important to note that there are two different ways 5xx data is being displayed: 1. All of the 5xx data is dumped into the descriptions tab without any parsing at all. That is, Koha doesn't examine which tag is which when being displayed. That's why there aren't any labels (See Bug 13248). 2. Some notes fields are selected by the XSL template for display outside of the descriptions tab. In the OPAC: 530, 505, 583, 586, 511, 502, and 520 In the staff client: 505 and 502 (fewer -- which may be the cause of the original report here?) Notes fields displayed by XSLT have an associated label because they are being explicitly chosen for display.
Hm, I am marking this WORKSFORME as we have confirmed that all the notes show the same in the title notes/description tabs. I think for a better display, another bug would be better to discuss things - like bug 13248.