Summary: | Remove special handling for <<borrower-attribute:CODE>> | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Koha | Reporter: | Martin Renvoize (ashimema) <martin.renvoize> |
Component: | Notices | Assignee: | Martin Renvoize (ashimema) <martin.renvoize> |
Status: | BLOCKED --- | QA Contact: | Testopia <testopia> |
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | P5 - low | CC: | anneli.osterman, blawlor, lucas |
Version: | Main | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
See Also: | https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=30657 | ||
GIT URL: | Change sponsored?: | --- | |
Patch complexity: | --- | Documentation contact: | |
Documentation submission: | Text to go in the release notes: | ||
Version(s) released in: | Circulation function: | ||
Bug Depends on: | 30657 | ||
Bug Blocks: | 31510 | ||
Attachments: | Bug 36270: Remove borrower-attribute:code from <<>> notices |
Description
Martin Renvoize (ashimema)
2024-03-07 10:54:35 UTC
Except.. the placeholder syntax is exposed in the selection options of the editor.. so it's likely in prevalent use all over the place :( Created attachment 162896 [details] [review] Bug 36270: Remove borrower-attribute:code from <<>> notices We need to replace this with a TT alternative however :| Could we provide a code example on how to achieve the same with TT? Or is this not available at all yet? I found a bug, but couldn't dig deeper yet: Bug 30657 - Make patron attributes available via Template Toolkit in overdues I can say that I've seen this used fairly often out in the wild. Do you have any clues on how often it's used with repeatable attributes Lucas? (In reply to Martin Renvoize from comment #6) > Do you have any clues on how often it's used with repeatable attributes > Lucas? Sorry Martin, I cannot really say with any certainty. I know I see it, but cannot say how widespread it is. <<borrower-attribute:code>> tag is used in our libraries for example in HOLD notices and HOLD_SLIP slips. We add patron's hold identifier and bookmobile stops to them with patron attributes. If this tag is removed we would need a substitute for it. Bug 30657 gives you a replacement syntax for TT A database update could be implement a find and replace I guess |