Bug 17291

Summary: Add <item>...</item> syntax to advance_notices.pl
Product: Koha Reporter: Barton Chittenden <barton>
Component: NoticesAssignee: Barton Chittenden <barton>
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX QA Contact: Testopia <testopia>
Severity: enhancement    
Priority: P5 - low CC: black23, dcook, katrin.fischer, r.delahunty
Version: Main   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
See Also: https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=29100
Change sponsored?: --- Patch complexity: ---
Documentation contact: Documentation submission:
Text to go in the release notes:
Version(s) released in:
Bug Depends on: 30259    
Bug Blocks:    

Description Barton Chittenden 2016-09-12 13:02:59 UTC
advance_notices.pl, which handles DUE, DUEDGST, PREDUE and PREDUEDGST notices, does *NOT* accept the


<item> ... </item>

Syntax used by overdue notices.

This is *VERY* confusing to users -- It's one of the most frequent trouble tickets handled by Bywater Solutions. As far as I can tell, there's no reason *not* to fix this.
Comment 1 Katrin Fischer 2017-01-03 09:28:33 UTC
+1 - more consistency and better formatting options.
Comment 2 Katrin Fischer 2019-01-02 15:55:26 UTC
Still much wanted :)
Comment 3 David Cook 2022-10-10 22:36:04 UTC
Since we're moving to TT syntax for notices, perhaps we should invalidate this one?
Comment 4 Katrin Fischer 2022-10-11 09:40:39 UTC
(In reply to David Cook from comment #3)
> Since we're moving to TT syntax for notices, perhaps we should invalidate
> this one?

I've linked to bug 29100  with that idea in mind, but wanted to have nice documentation in place first :)
Comment 5 Katrin Fischer 2023-06-25 12:14:04 UTC
(In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #4)
> (In reply to David Cook from comment #3)
> > Since we're moving to TT syntax for notices, perhaps we should invalidate
> > this one?
> 
> I've linked to bug 29100  with that idea in mind, but wanted to have nice
> documentation in place first :)

We could do better with documentation still, but I think bug 29100 obsoletes this one.