---- Reported by tajoli@cilea.it 2009-04-27 16:17:52 ---- The defintion of visibilty of MARC subfields in the enviroments used (Opac, Intranet, Editor) is different between MARC Bibliographic framework [http://<your site>:8080/cgi-bin/koha/admin/biblio_framework.pl] and Authority framework [http://<your site>:8080/cgi-bin/koha/admin/authtypes.pl] In MARC Bibliographic framework to setup this option we use an input box that accepts values between -7 to 8. The meaning of the values is explained into the on-line help. No problems here. In Authority framework there are 3 List boxes (one for Opac, one for Intranet, one for Editor). The CGI with the bug is .../admin/auth_subfields_structure.pl For example see the defintion of field 035 (on Unimarc or MARC21 default framework): http://<your site>:8080/cgi-bin/koha/admin/auth_subfields_structure.pl?op=add_form&tagfield=035&authtypecode= But those 3 values are managed by only one SQL field, auth_subfield_structure.hidden. This field is a tinyint(3) field. So, when the system tries to save a value like '000', Mysql transform it into '0'. So not all option avaible in the inteface are recoredable into auth_subfield_structure.hidden The defintions of Authority subfields in installer/data/mysql/fr-FR/marcflavour/unimarc_complet/Obligatoire/autorites_norme_unimarc.sql and in installer/data/mysql/en/marcflavour/marc21/mandatory/authorities_normal_marc21.sql still use the scale -7 ... 8 And in fact the CGI for the display .../opac/opac-authoritiesdetail.pl .../authorities/detail-biblio-search.pl .../authorities/detail.pl still use the scale -7 ... 8 with problems. In fact the lines used in ../opac/opac-authoritiesdetail.pl .../authorities/detail-biblio-search.pl .../authorities/detail.pl to check the value of auth_subfield_structure.hidden are: $subfield_data{visibility} = "display:none;" if ( ($tagslib->{$tag}->{$subfield}->{hidden} % 2 == 1) and $value ne '' or ($value eq '' and !$tagslib->{$tag}->{$subfield}->{mandatory}) ); So the only two values that it is possible to use are 0 (or every evan value that means 'show all') and -7 (or ever odd value that means hide all). Well, this the problem. About solution ? My proposal is: -- for tree 3.0 I will write a patch to use the values '0','-5' with the meanings 'show all' vs 'hide all'. I select those two values because are just now used into SQL authority default defintions. So I need to change only the code of ../admin/auth_subfields_structure.pl, the help template and display template No changes in SQL defintion, into others CGI or into SQL authority default defintions. -- for tree 3.2 I think we need to plan a better system. Probably use 3 list box is better but we need to decide: a)Do we do the work with one SQL field or with three fields ? b)And what about MARC Bibliographic framework c)And about migration of framework from 3.0 to 3.2 ? That's all, I think Bye ---- Additional Comments From gmcharlt@gmail.com 2009-04-27 16:25:37 ---- > -- for tree 3.2 I think we need to plan a better system. > Probably use 3 list box is better but we need to decide: I agree that the three dropdown lists is a better UI. > a)Do we do the work with one SQL field or with three fields ? I vote for splitting it into three - it will be easier to maintain and less prone to bugs. > b)And what about MARC Bibliographic framework I think the same UI for setting the visibility and the same set of database columns should be used for both authority and bibliographic frameworks. > c)And about migration of framework from 3.0 to 3.2 ? The updatedatabase.pl part will be easy. It will be necessary to change the base MARC21 and UNIMARC SQL files as well. ---- Additional Comments From tajoli@cilea.it 2009-05-17 20:51:01 ---- I have send a patch for the problem but only for version 3.0.x ---- Additional Comments From mjr@ttllp.co.uk 2009-06-07 11:42:22 ---- This bug is described as fixed in the release notes for version 3.0.2 in the git tree. ---- Additional Comments From gmcharlt@gmail.com 2009-06-07 17:56:37 ---- Reopening. Not resolved in HEAD. ---- Additional Comments From tajoli@cilea.it 2009-06-08 15:02:25 ---- I confirm that this bug is open in HEAD but close for 3.0.2 In 3.0.2 I have done only an hack to fix it. But for 3.2 we need a better (and a more difficult) patch. ---- Additional Comments From tajoli@cilea.it 2009-08-13 13:35:17 ---- I change the Priority, the Version and the Severity of this bug. I config that for 3.0.x tree is close. But we still need to work for 3.2 tree ---- Additional Comments From tajoli@cilea.it 2010-02-10 09:16:00 ---- I confirm that this bug is still open in 3.2 tree. It is close in 3.0 tree. ---- Additional Comments From gmcharlt@gmail.com 2010-02-10 11:11:15 ---- Changing to blocker as it is an issue that is fixed in the maintenance branch but whose fix was not submitted to HEAD. I intend to forward-port the "hack" from the 3.0.x branch unless Zeno has another patch available for HEAD. ---- Additional Comments From gmcharlt@gmail.com 2010-02-10 11:25:02 ---- Cherry-picked patch from 3.0.x. This should only be temporary, but for now marking as enhancement and retargetting to 3.4 ---- Additional Comments From tajoli@cilea.it 2010-02-10 15:03:22 ---- I confirm that I don't have a good solution for 3.2. I see the cherry-picking. OK --- Bug imported by chris@bigballofwax.co.nz 2010-05-21 01:07 UTC --- This bug was previously known as _bug_ 3162 at http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=3162 Actual time not defined. Setting to 0.0 CC member irma@calyx.net.au does not have an account here
Zeno, is this still valid? We know have checkboxes for the bibliographic frameworks - but not sure that resolves the problem described here.
(In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #1) > Zeno, is this still valid? We know have checkboxes for the bibliographic > frameworks - but not sure that resolves the problem described here. Hi Katrin, in fact this bug is a mix of a bug and a request for a new feature. The bug part is fixed, now SQL files for authorities, templates and .pl are coherent. You can select only 'Show all' (value 0) or 'Hide all' (value -5). So I close the bug but I open a new bug (12284) for the future develop.