Created attachment 160266 [details] OLIB cataloging system item modification log The modification logs for a bib record puts all bibliographic and item information in a single text box when an edit occurs. For easier reading it would be nice to only show the fields/information that were modified. A previous catalog our library used would show a single line per change when an item was modified. It would show the date | person who made the change | old value | new value. This kept an accurate history and made reviewing the changes easy to read. As there is a single modification page for all items on a bib record the object column identifying which item was changed would need to be included. A similar table could be created for bib record modifications identifying the MARC field that was changed either in the Object column or in its own column, along with the old and new values.
Created attachment 160267 [details] Current Koha modification log view
We often find it difficult to identify the edit that has been made int he modification log. Agree that a more concise change log as Angela describes would be helpful. A step in that direction might be do highlight or change the color of the field(s) that had been edited. I imagine that might be easier coding?
Yes please, this would be a great enhancement. +1
(In reply to Kathleen L. from comment #2) > We often find it difficult to identify the edit that has been made int he > modification log. Agree that a more concise change log as Angela describes > would be helpful. > > A step in that direction might be do highlight or change the color of the > field(s) that had been edited. I imagine that might be easier coding? I like the idea of highlighting as a start. With the 24.11 enhancement to log an item's previous data as well as the changed data this could be a useful conversation again.
Definitely would like to have this. I find it very challenging to parse down to the actual change -- I feel like I waste a lot of time struggling to understand.
Would it be sufficient to just include the action_logs.diff column in the log viewer, or would be want to format that data somehow? For reference, here's that diff column after an edit to remove a public note: {"D":{"datelastseen":{"O":"2025-04-11 13:44:14","N":"2025-04-11 13:44:00"},"timestamp":{"O":"2025-04-11 13:44:14","N":"2025-04-11 13:44:45"},"itemnotes":{"N":null,"O":"boop"}}}
(In reply to Andrew Fuerste-Henry from comment #6) > Would it be sufficient to just include the action_logs.diff column in the > log viewer, or would be want to format that data somehow? For reference, > here's that diff column after an edit to remove a public note: > > {"D":{"datelastseen":{"O":"2025-04-11 13:44:14","N":"2025-04-11 > 13:44:00"},"timestamp":{"O":"2025-04-11 13:44:14","N":"2025-04-11 > 13:44:45"},"itemnotes":{"N":null,"O":"boop"}}} That would be sufficient if formatting is difficult - at least in my opinion.
Created attachment 180904 [details] [review] Bug 35645: Show diff in log viewer To test: 1 - apply patch 2 - search the log viewer for item edits or something else that records a diff value 3 - see that diff in the new column 4 - confirm the diff value is present in exports and prints 5 - confirm you can use column config to hide that diff value
This simply makes the diff visible. It should be pretty doable to get it to format more readably (for someone with more display skill than I).
Though I must admit, the change I've made here is really broader than the current title of this bug. Angela, do you mind if I re-title and re-focus this, or should I file my own bug?
(In reply to Andrew Fuerste-Henry from comment #10) > Though I must admit, the change I've made here is really broader than the > current title of this bug. Angela, do you mind if I re-title and re-focus > this, or should I file my own bug? Would you call this more of an "interim solution" that is a step towards redesigning the front-end format? If so, another bug might be good, and just link it to this one as the end goal. It sounds like the ideal format is a more concise and reader-friendly one (less punctuation, more full words) for those of us who are not great at reading code. If this is a final solution, then you are welcome to change this bug.
I've filed a new bug for my patch to just make the diff visible and will leave this one for a more refined view. I also saw bug 36698 for a nice view of the diff.