Created attachment 36046 [details] example It would be nice to have the option to see the new 33x fields in the staff and the OPAC. They should have their own ID tag though so they can be hidden by those who don't want to see them.
Are there a few example records I could use for testing? (MARCXML format would be most helpful) Thanks! -Winona
Created attachment 36825 [details] Example MARC Here a few records with 33x fields
Is this for both the results list and the details pages? Or just in the details? Thanks, -Winona (In reply to Nicole C. Engard from comment #2) > Created attachment 36825 [details] > Example MARC > > Here a few records with 33x fields
Created attachment 36919 [details] [review] Add fields 336, 337 and 338 to the full displays in the staff
I think some css work will need to be done to get them to display inline? Or if necessary, I can change the output in the xslt. (In reply to Winona Salesky from comment #4) > Created attachment 36919 [details] [review] [review] > Add fields 336, 337 and 338 to the full displays in the staff
Created attachment 36920 [details] [review] Updates 336, 337 and 338 to the full displays in the staff and OPAC
Never mind, I fixed it so they appear inline. -Winona (In reply to Winona Salesky from comment #6) > Created attachment 36920 [details] [review] [review] > Updates 336, 337 and 338 to the full displays in the staff and OPAC (In reply to Winona Salesky from comment #5) > I think some css work will need to be done to get them to display inline? Or > if necessary, I can change the output in the xslt. > > > (In reply to Winona Salesky from comment #4) > > Created attachment 36919 [details] [review] [review] [review] > > Add fields 336, 337 and 338 to the full displays in the staff
This patch adds the 33x fields to the full display in staff and OPAC views. Display has id='content_type' so it can be easily suppressed. Test Plan: 1) Apply this patch 2) Ensure you are using the default XSLT setting for the staff and opac search results and record details 3) Find or create a record with MARC tags 335, 337 and/or 338 4) Perform an opac search that would show the record in the search results 5) Note the fields displays ( here you could go into detail about how and where the field should show ) 6) Repeat steps 4 and 5 for the staff interface
Created attachment 37218 [details] [review] Bug 13734 - RDA: Display 33xs Test Plan: 1) Apply this patch 2) Ensure you are using the default XSLT setting for the staff and opac search results and record details 3) Find or create a record with MARC tags 700,710,711 4) Perform an opac search that would show the record in the search results. 5) Click title to review record. 6) Adds fields 336, 337 and 338 to staff and opac details 7) Repeat steps 4 - 6 for the staff interface
looks good for single fields, but repeated fields 33x or multiple $a in one field need a separator. I think using the same '|' wrapped in a span as similar bugs makes sense
Okay, I will take a look. Thanks. -Winona (In reply to Nick Clemens from comment #10) > looks good for single fields, but repeated fields 33x or multiple $a in one > field need a separator. > > I think using the same '|' wrapped in a span as similar bugs makes sense
Does a '|' make sense for both multiple $a in one field and repeated 33x fields? That seems a little awkward to me. What about commas between $a and '|' between repeated fields? Any thoughts? Thanks! -Winona (In reply to Winona Salesky from comment #11) > Okay, I will take a look. > Thanks. > -Winona > > (In reply to Nick Clemens from comment #10) > > looks good for single fields, but repeated fields 33x or multiple $a in one > > field need a separator. > > > > I think using the same '|' wrapped in a span as similar bugs makes sense (In reply to Winona Salesky from comment #11) > Okay, I will take a look. > Thanks. > -Winona > > (In reply to Nick Clemens from comment #10) > > looks good for single fields, but repeated fields 33x or multiple $a in one > > field need a separator. > > > > I think using the same '|' wrapped in a span as similar bugs makes sense
That (In reply to Winona Salesky from comment #12) > Does a '|' make sense for both multiple $a in one field and repeated 33x > fields? That seems a little awkward to me. What about commas between $a and > '|' between repeated fields? Any thoughts? > Seems like a good compromise to me
Created attachment 38620 [details] [review] Bug 13734 - RDA: Display 33xs Test Plan: 1) Apply this patch 2) Ensure you are using the default XSLT setting for the staff and opac search results and record details 3) Find or create a record with MARC tags 336,337,338 4) Perform an opac search that would show the record in the search results. 5) Click title to review record. 6) Adds fields 336, 337 and 338 to staff and opac details. Adds comma between multiple subfields and | with class='separator' between multiple datafields (e.g. two 336 fields) 7) Repeat steps 4 - 6 for the staff interface
Created attachment 38957 [details] [review] [SIGNED-OFF] Bug 13734: RDA: Display 33xs Test Plan: 1) Apply this patch 2) Ensure you are using the default XSLT setting for the staff and opac search results and record details 3) Find or create a record with MARC tags 336,337,338 4) Perform an opac search that would show the record in the search results. 5) Click title to review record. 6) Adds fields 336, 337 and 338 to staff and opac details. Adds comma between multiple subfields and | with class='separator' between multiple datafields (e.g. two 336 fields) 7) Repeat steps 4 - 6 for the staff interface Signed-off-by: Bernardo Gonzalez Kriegel <bgkriegel@gmail.com> Works, no errors
Created attachment 41702 [details] [review] Bug 13734: RDA: Display 33xs Test Plan: 1) Apply this patch 2) Ensure you are using the default XSLT setting for the staff and opac search results and record details 3) Find or create a record with MARC tags 336,337,338 4) Perform an opac search that would show the record in the search results. 5) Click title to review record. 6) Adds fields 336, 337 and 338 to staff and opac details. Adds comma between multiple subfields and | with class='separator' between multiple datafields (e.g. two 336 fields) 7) Repeat steps 4 - 6 for the staff interface Signed-off-by: Bernardo Gonzalez Kriegel <bgkriegel@gmail.com> Works, no errors Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
QA Comment: Had to make these fields visible, but works fine. Note that delimeter looks like a spelling error, but it is already there.. Passed QA
Patch pushed to master. Good job Winona!