Summary: | No Holds on Lost Items | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Koha | Reporter: | Nicole C. Engard <nengard> |
Component: | Circulation | Assignee: | Galen Charlton <gmcharlt> |
Status: | CLOSED WORKSFORME | QA Contact: | Bugs List <koha-bugs> |
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | P3 | CC: | hughr, katrin.fischer, koha.sekjal, marjorie.barry-vila, veron |
Version: | master | ||
Hardware: | PC | ||
OS: | All | ||
Change sponsored?: | --- | Patch complexity: | --- |
Documentation contact: | Documentation submission: | ||
Text to go in the release notes: | Version(s) released in: |
Description
Chris Cormack
2010-05-21 00:54:59 UTC
I think for some situations a hold on a lost item might make sense. It would give the library a reason to purchase another item. So this would need to be controlled by configuration settings. Still valid? I think this is reasonably well answered here:
>From the OPAC if hidelostitems is ON you cannot place a hold - but I guess
>there are libraries that are displaying their lost items.
Katrin's right that it should be a toggle, but effectively it already is. If you want people to see lost items then you probably want them to be able to place holds on records where all items are lost. And if you don't want them to do that, then you can just hide lost items.
(In reply to Hugh Rundle from comment #3) > I think this is reasonably well answered here: > > >From the OPAC if hidelostitems is ON you cannot place a hold - but I guess > >there are libraries that are displaying their lost items. > > Katrin's right that it should be a toggle, but effectively it already is. If > you want people to see lost items then you probably want them to be able to > place holds on records where all items are lost. And if you don't want them > to do that, then you can just hide lost items. Closing WORKSFORME as per this comment. |