Created attachment 4326 [details] Screenshot of expanded subfields When adding a new MARC record, all subfields are expanded/visible by default, even though they have hidden = 0. See attached screenshot and selection from marc_subfield_structure below. mysql> select tagfield, tagsubfield, liblibrarian, hidden from marc_subfield_structure where tagfield = 800; +----------+-------------+------------------------------------------+--------+ | tagfield | tagsubfield | liblibrarian | hidden | +----------+-------------+------------------------------------------+--------+ | 800 | 8 | Andre karakteristika forbundet med navn. | 0 | | 800 | a | Navn. | 0 | | 800 | b | Nummer. | 0 | | 800 | c | Andre tilføyelser. | 0 | | 800 | d | Årstall forbundet med navn. | 0 | | 800 | j | Nasjonalitet. | 0 | | 800 | l | Språk | 0 | | 800 | q | Mer fullstendig navneform. | 0 | | 800 | t | Tittel for serien. | 0 | | 800 | u | Sorteringsdelfelt for delfelt $t. | 0 | | 800 | v | Bind, nummer etc. | 0 | | 800 | w | Sorteringsdelfelt for delfelt $a. | 0 | | 800 | x | ISSN. | 0 | +----------+-------------+------------------------------------------+--------+ This started happening around the introduction of T:T and/or version 3.4. Others have reported the same behaviour, so it should not be a NORMARC thing. I have seen it both on current master and 3.4.1.
See bug 4374: http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=4374 *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 4374 ***
Take a look at comment 9
This is not resolved, and it's not a duplicate of 4374, it's a consequence of it. The changed that was pushed for 4374 broke the field hiding for the Frameworks, and this bug report will be used to track how we're going to fix it.
(In reply to comment #3) > This is not resolved, and it's not a duplicate of 4374, it's a > consequence of it. The changed that was pushed for 4374 broke the > field hiding for the Frameworks, and this bug report will be used to > track how we're going to fix it. I pointed to bug 4374 to show where this issue comes from. I didn't say it's a duplicate. And I specifically pointed to this comment included to the patch for RM: TO BE INTEGRATED IN RELEASE NOTES: Koha sysadmin should have to edit its frameworks to add hidden=1 in appropriate subfields. For libraries who have crafted their own framework, this isn't really an issue since they already show a subset of MARC fields. For libraries who use Default framework, it is. For them, this can speed up the transition: - UPDATE marc_subfield_structure SET hidden=-1 - Then by hand, in Koha framework editor, show specific subfields, for example in MARC21: 008, 020a, 245ab, 260abc, 700a
Created attachment 5653 [details] Form before expanding
Created attachment 5654 [details] Form after expanding
I've attached 2 screenshots to recall why a functional hidden feature is desirable: - 'Form before expanding' shows a Koha data entry form when adding a new biblio record. Fields 600 to 620 are collapsed, except field 606 which is often filled but just subfields 2 & a. - 'Form after expanding' shows the same form after clicking on '606' tag label. All hidden subfields are shown. Of course, when modifying a biblio, all filled subfields are shown even if they are marked as hidden in framework.
I suggest you check the activity log Frederic You did mark it resolved-duplicate http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_activity.cgi?id=6439 But that aside, I agree we need the hiding feature back
> You did mark it resolved-duplicate Ok, sorry, I misused bugzilla. Let reword it as 'I didn't want to say this bug is a duplicate of but that it is related to'...
Is this bug still valid in master? Under what circumstances are hidden subfields shown when they should not be? When I open a record for editing I see some subfields are hidden which are marked as such, and others -- which have data in them -- are not hidden.
(In reply to Owen Leonard from comment #10) > Is this bug still valid in master? Under what circumstances are hidden > subfields shown when they should not be? When I open a record for editing I > see some subfields are hidden which are marked as such, and others -- which > have data in them -- are not hidden. I would suspect this has been fixed, or more people would complain about it. :-)