Summary: | Have consistent signature in sample notices | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Koha | Reporter: | Caroline Cyr La Rose <caroline.cyr-la-rose> |
Component: | Notices | Assignee: | Bugs List <koha-bugs> |
Status: | NEW --- | QA Contact: | Testopia <testopia> |
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | P5 - low | CC: | alexander.wagner, lari.taskula, philip.orr |
Version: | Main | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
See Also: |
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=35832 https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=30723 |
||
GIT URL: | Change sponsored?: | --- | |
Patch complexity: | --- | Documentation contact: | |
Documentation submission: | Text to go in the release notes: | ||
Version(s) released in: | Circulation function: |
Description
Caroline Cyr La Rose
2024-12-18 19:47:24 UTC
For sample notices (and for easier translation :) ) it might be good to have it as simple as possible. So not the full address. I like "Thank you,<br>branchname" as well. Or "Kind regards,<br>branchname", I would prefer either of them. Could we re-use the address includes we use in other spots for the signature? This way we could also pull the different formats according to the AddressFormat system preference (I18N). Similar to Katrin I'd also vote for the possibility to move the signature to a separate file and include it somehow, not only for the samples but also for "real life". It's quite a number of notices where it should be added consistently, and it might be quite lengthy as well. This would also help in the translation issues Philip mentions: it's just one file that needs to be translated. If it's possible to include a signature somehow right now did not notice that as I started out with the samples. So for me as a newbe they also serve as a "how they do it in Koha". BTW: I'd also suggest to split off signatures from the mail body by the usual marker (`-- ` in it's own line). Including it in a file might also allow to enforce standard conformity by Koha adding it before the signature. (cf. RFC 3676, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3676#section-4.3) The same goes with greetings. Some examples - (no greeting) - "<<borrowers.firstname>> <<borrowers.surname>>," - "Dear <<borrowers.firstname>> <<borrowers.surname>>," - "Dear [% borrower.firstname %] [% borrower.surname %] ([% borrower.cardnumber %])" - "Dear [%- INCLUDE 'patron-title.inc' patron => booking.patron -%],<br>" - "Hello [% borrower.title %] [% borrower.firstname %] [% borrower.surname %].<br>" - "Hello [% borrower.firstname %] [% borrower.surname %] ([% borrower.cardnumber %])," - "Hi,<br><br> I'd separate the signatures and greetings from the notice template bodies and propose adding a configurable greeting/header and a signature/footer as a notice-wide, library-wide and a global setting (in this order, whatever is defined first is selected to the notice). This way libraries could manage the signatures and the greetings without necessarily having to modify all of the notice templates. Library-wide and global settings would have to be configurable by notice language, message transport type and the is_html flag. (In reply to Lari Taskula from comment #4) > I'd separate the signatures and greetings from the notice template bodies and propose adding a configurable greeting/header and a signature/footer The above was already proposed in Bug 30723. See also Bug 35832. It seems all of the three Bugs at least partially overlap each other. |