Bug 38702 - Vendor ID entered into 952$e when receiving
Summary: Vendor ID entered into 952$e when receiving
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Acquisitions (show other bugs)
Version: Main
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low enhancement
Assignee: Bugs List
QA Contact: Testopia
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2024-12-13 17:34 UTC by Esther Melander
Modified: 2024-12-16 18:32 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
GIT URL:
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 Esther Melander 2024-12-13 17:34:13 UTC
To Replicate

1. Check the Default framework and ensure the 952$e is available.
2. Set up the vendor and basket. Have items created when ordered
3. Create a basket and add some orders.
4. Close the basket.
5. Check the item record that was generated for the orders. Notice the 952$e is blank.
6. Receive the orders.
7. Now look at the items again and see a random number has been entered into the 952$e.

A number should not be added to the 952$e.Tested with MarcItemFieldsToOrder configured and also blank and the number appears regardless.
Comment 1 Katrin Fischer 2024-12-14 13:34:41 UTC
I believe that is the expected behavior. It creates the link between the vendor and the item. If you look at the holdings table in 24.11 on the details page, it will show a column showing the vendor name built from that information.
Comment 2 Esther Melander 2024-12-16 16:56:08 UTC
I observed this on 24.05.

This causes a problem if a library has created authorized values for that field. The insertion of the vendor ID then appears as not an authorized value and looks like an error.

The vendor ID is inserted in the 952$e of the add/edit Item Form and not the Vendor name. Even though the ID is meant to link to the Vendor name for display in the Item Detail and the Acquisitions tab of the holdings table, it is not useful in the add/edit Item form. IOW, the number doesn't mean anything unless one knows what the number represents. One has to know to look at the URL on the Vendor detail page to identify the Vendor ID because it is not displayed anywhere else.

So there is a potential conflict if the 952$e has been configured to use authorized values. And the display of the Vendor ID versus the Vendor Name in the add/edit Item form is confusing.
Comment 3 Katrin Fischer 2024-12-16 17:56:27 UTC
Maybe this could be made configurable, but it's always been like that (since around 3.2 at least) and I believe we have reports etc. relying on this information, also the display does in some places. We can only display a reliable link to the vendor using the ID, as a name might change. 

If there is an authorised value, unknown values should now be handled without data loss I believe at least.

I had also filed a report to have a value builder that allows to search vendors:
bug 29258
Maybe this could be an alternative to the AV?
Comment 4 Esther Melander 2024-12-16 18:32:06 UTC
Yes, it may need to be configurable for libraries. My example library uses authorized values that categorize the type of acquisition. For example, the values are Donation, Replacement, Budget, etc. So in this case, the authorized values are being used for unique information and not vendor names.

Either that, or the ability to assign authorized values to this field needs to be disabled since the field is used in unique ways.

Documentation on how this field is used in Koha would also be helpful. :)