Bug 10881 - Fast Add Framework has different item fields
Summary: Fast Add Framework has different item fields
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Cataloging (show other bugs)
Version: Main
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low normal (vote)
Assignee: Galen Charlton
QA Contact: Testopia
URL:
Keywords: Academy
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2013-09-12 20:11 UTC by Angela Kilsdonk
Modified: 2023-07-08 21:25 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Change sponsored?: ---
Patch complexity: ---
Documentation contact:
Documentation submission:
Text to go in the release notes:
Version(s) released in:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Angela Kilsdonk 2013-09-12 20:11:46 UTC
When using the Fast Add MARC Framework, the Add Item form is different from the Add Item form that appears with other Frameworks.  Additional fields are visible in the Fast Add item form.  I also noticed that Nonpublic notes added in the Fast Add item form do not show up in the Notes during check in.
Comment 1 Nicole C. Engard 2013-11-11 19:40:35 UTC
Nonpublic notes never show during check in - even if they're on a framework other than the fast add. The fast add should have a different item form since it's a different framework.
Comment 2 Katrin Fischer 2015-01-06 23:41:26 UTC
I just checked and the item form on the default FA framework includes really too many subfields, including some that should not be edited:

q - Koha out on loan
r - Koha date last seen
s - Koha date last borrowed

I think it would be good to remove at least those subfields and some oters from the editor
Comment 3 Katrin Fischer 2016-01-18 00:10:57 UTC
Picking only important item subfields for a shorter Fast Add form would be nice!
Comment 4 Aleisha Amohia 2018-12-19 02:56:32 UTC
Hi Katrin,

Can you please confirm which fields should be removed from the Fast Add form?

Aleisha
Comment 5 Katrin Fischer 2018-12-20 19:13:55 UTC
Hi Aleiha,

I'd hide using the hidden values (not delete) the following:

- s - Date last checked out
- r - Date last seen
- q - Checked out
- n - Total holds
- m - Total renewals

I think it could be helfpul to check which values those have in the default framework.

Maybe also:

- w - Price effective from
- f - Coded location qualifier
- 1 - Lost status (fast add that is already lost?)

I think we could debate if it might make sense to haven even less fields for a true "fast" (quick) add feature (like: a, b, c, 2, h, y, i, 8, o, p, t, x, z) - 

Removing the ones listed above to match more with the normal framework should be safe.
Comment 6 Katrin Fischer 2023-07-08 21:25:31 UTC
I had thought this might have been resolved with the switch to YAML files, but it's still the case.