Summary: | Require at least one alphabetic character in first name and surname patron record fields | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Koha | Reporter: | Hannah Dunne-Howrie <hdunne-howrie> |
Component: | Patrons | Assignee: | Bugs List <koha-bugs> |
Status: | NEW --- | QA Contact: | Testopia <testopia> |
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | P5 - low | CC: | dcook, gmcharlt, kyle |
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
GIT URL: | Change sponsored?: | --- | |
Patch complexity: | --- | Documentation contact: | |
Documentation submission: | Text to go in the release notes: | ||
Version(s) released in: | Circulation function: |
Description
Hannah Dunne-Howrie
2025-07-14 12:02:39 UTC
There is BorrowerMandatoryField to make fields mandatory which would require something to be entered before saving. Can you explain, why this is not enough/doesn't work for you? (In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #1) > There is BorrowerMandatoryField to make fields mandatory which would require > something to be entered before saving. Can you explain, why this is not > enough/doesn't work for you? I believe that they're saying they want additional data validation rules for their name fields for patron records. -- Server-side data validation of individual fields is a broad topic that has been discussed a bit in Koha, but it's a massive task to make that systematic massive improvement. That said, I do think it's something that needs to be done at some point. One of the hardest parts if coming up with a backend design that enough people agree on. -- In terms of front-end validation, for opac-memberentry.pl and memberentry.pl it looks like we're using the jQuery Validator plugin. It should be fairly easy to use *UserJS to add additional jQuery Validator rules and methods. Since "name fields would require at least one alphabetic character to be included" isn't a universal rule that would apply to everyone, this might be the most practical approach to take. Yes, that's correct. While we can make a field mandatory we are seeing a problem with low quality in name field data. We are seeing accounts created with for example "1" or other numbers added into the name fields instead of actual names. We want to add in some additional data validation rules so we can better control this. (In reply to Hannah Dunne-Howrie from comment #3) > Yes, that's correct. While we can make a field mandatory we are seeing a > problem with low quality in name field data. We are seeing accounts created > with for example "1" or other numbers added into the name fields instead of > actual names. We want to add in some additional data validation rules so we > can better control this. By the way, is this for self-registration, OPAC self-modification, staff interface, or all the above? Great question. All of the above! |