Bug 13848 - XSLT and OpacItemLocation sys pref
Summary: XSLT and OpacItemLocation sys pref
Status: CLOSED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: OPAC (show other bugs)
Version: 3.16
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low enhancement (vote)
Assignee: Owen Leonard
QA Contact: Testopia
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2015-03-16 17:31 UTC by Ed Veal
Modified: 2020-11-30 21:45 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Change sponsored?: ---
Patch complexity: ---
Documentation contact:
Documentation submission:
Text to go in the release notes:
Version(s) released in:


Attachments
[SIGNED-OFF] Bug 13948: Add ability to dump template toolkit variables to html comment (10.83 KB, patch)
2015-05-16 19:45 UTC, Bernardo Gonzalez Kriegel
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[SIGNED-OFF] Bug 13948 [QA Followup] - Make dependency optional (891 bytes, patch)
2015-05-16 19:45 UTC, Bernardo Gonzalez Kriegel
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[SIGNED-OFF] Bug 13948: Prevent explosion when Template::Plugin::Stash not installed (3.33 KB, patch)
2015-05-16 19:45 UTC, Bernardo Gonzalez Kriegel
Details | Diff | Splinter Review

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Ed Veal 2015-03-16 17:31:15 UTC
If you turn on the call number only in the OpacItemLocation system preference the system is removing the call number from the availability line when the item is available for check out. However, when the item is not available for check out the call number is being left. As a result you have the call number being displayed twice. 

Ed
Comment 1 Bernardo Gonzalez Kriegel 2015-05-16 19:45:15 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 2 Bernardo Gonzalez Kriegel 2015-05-16 19:45:24 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 3 Bernardo Gonzalez Kriegel 2015-05-16 19:45:32 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 4 Bernardo Gonzalez Kriegel 2015-05-16 19:47:14 UTC
Sorry, wrong bug :(
Comment 5 Owen Leonard 2016-06-21 18:13:14 UTC
If I understand the description of the problem correctly, this is not valid in master. Ed can you please check?
Comment 6 Katrin Fischer 2020-01-06 15:24:46 UTC
At the moment I can't replicate the callnumber issue on master, but have filed bug 24352 to deal with some other oddity.