Bug 24729 - Set specific 008 positions as mandatory for Advanced Search functionality
Summary: Set specific 008 positions as mandatory for Advanced Search functionality
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Cataloging (show other bugs)
Version: Main
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low enhancement
Assignee: Bugs List
QA Contact: Testopia
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2020-02-25 17:18 UTC by Christopher Brannon
Modified: 2020-02-26 12:47 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

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


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Christopher Brannon 2020-02-25 17:18:32 UTC
I've noticed a hole in cataloging that some library might not deal with, and others do, but it is certainly a hole for our libraries.

We found that the advanced search subtype limits (Audience, content, format, additional content types), rely on the 008 field.  However, our libraries have chosen not to fill those in, and the sources they download these records from have chosen not to fill them in either.

I'm wondering if it would be a smart idea, that since these search fields rely on this information, if it is not filled in for a bib record, there should be some sort of warning on the bib record/item records in cataloging, so catalogers are aware that these records are not complete.  In fact, any other field that any search limit could rely on could have a similar warning for catalogers.
Comment 1 Katrin Fischer 2020-02-25 20:42:54 UTC
So maybe we are looking for way to make certain positions mandatory/important for the control fields - do you mean that?
Comment 2 Katrin Fischer 2020-02-25 20:43:29 UTC
Trying to think of a way we can make the title of this more specific - most people will only check that.
Comment 3 Christopher Brannon 2020-02-25 22:12:00 UTC
(In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #1)
> So maybe we are looking for way to make certain positions
> mandatory/important for the control fields - do you mean that?

That would help too, but if people are importing records and not touching them, it would be great if there were some indication on the staff side that the record is incomplete as well.  Having a mandatory field only works if you are editing the record.
Comment 4 Owen Leonard 2020-02-26 12:47:27 UTC
Perhaps an alternate solution would be some kind of error report to run after the fact?