Bug 8760 - Phone number Field tags are reversed in patron record
Summary: Phone number Field tags are reversed in patron record
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 12407
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Patrons (show other bugs)
Version: 3.8
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low normal
Assignee: Jesse Maseto
QA Contact:
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2012-09-11 16:45 UTC by Jesse Maseto
Modified: 2014-07-31 12:31 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

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


Attachments
Screen Shoot (34.45 KB, image/png)
2012-09-11 16:45 UTC, Jesse Maseto
Details
Screen Shoot 2 (18.32 KB, image/png)
2012-09-11 16:46 UTC, Jesse Maseto
Details
Patron data in the OPAC (26.25 KB, image/jpeg)
2014-01-24 22:46 UTC, Joel Sasse
Details
Patron data in the staff client (60.47 KB, image/jpeg)
2014-01-24 22:47 UTC, Joel Sasse
Details
Patron data in the database schema (90.95 KB, image/jpeg)
2014-01-24 22:48 UTC, Joel Sasse
Details
Adjusted fields to display correctly. Now the fields on the memberentry page match the memberdetails page. (2.52 KB, patch)
2014-03-12 14:36 UTC, Jesse Maseto
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[SIGNED-OFF] Bug 8760 - Phone number Field tags are reversed in patron record (2.68 KB, patch)
2014-03-12 15:26 UTC, Owen Leonard
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
Bug 8760 - Phone number Field tags are reversed in patron record (2.63 KB, patch)
2014-03-12 17:57 UTC, Katrin Fischer
Details | Diff | Splinter Review

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jesse Maseto 2012-09-11 16:45:40 UTC
Created attachment 12139 [details]
Screen Shoot

Phone number Field tags are reversed in patron record.
Comment 1 Jesse Maseto 2012-09-11 16:46:50 UTC
Created attachment 12140 [details]
Screen Shoot 2
Comment 2 Joel Sasse 2014-01-24 22:46:52 UTC
Created attachment 24722 [details]
Patron data in the OPAC
Comment 3 Joel Sasse 2014-01-24 22:47:36 UTC
Created attachment 24723 [details]
Patron data in the staff client
Comment 4 Joel Sasse 2014-01-24 22:48:06 UTC
Created attachment 24724 [details]
Patron data in the database schema
Comment 5 Joel Sasse 2014-01-24 22:50:43 UTC
I've attached some additional screenshots highlighting this issue. These mismatched labels cause confusion when processing patron requests for modifications to their personal details.

Also, why do the three values each have a different variable type in the database? Phone is text, mobbile is varchar, and fax is mediumtext. Is there a reason for this?
Comment 6 Jesse Maseto 2014-03-12 14:36:15 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 7 Owen Leonard 2014-03-12 15:26:17 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 8 Katrin Fischer 2014-03-12 17:57:39 UTC
Created attachment 26215 [details] [review]
Bug 8760 - Phone number Field tags are reversed in patron record

Adjusted fields to display correctly. Now the fields on the
memberentry page match the memberdetails page.

To test:
Select a patron account that you can edit their phone number information

Fill in all 3 phone number fields:

	 Primary phone:  #1
         Secondary phone: #2
         Other phone: #3

Then view the member details page. This will display #1,#3,#2.

Apply patch and should display correctly.

http://bugs.koha-community.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8760
Signed-off-by: Owen Leonard <oleonard@myacpl.org>
Comment 9 Galen Charlton 2014-04-09 23:16:00 UTC
I'm not convinced that this is the correct fix.  After applying the patch, if you enter the following in the phone fields:

primary: "primary"
secondary: "secondary'
other: "mobile"

while the staff-side patron display is consistent, the OPAC display is not:

Primary phone: primary
Secondary phone: mobile
Mobile phone: secondary

and the database gets populated like this:

MariaDB [koha]> select phone, phonepro, mobile from borrowers where borrowernumber = 12092\G
*************************** 1. row ***************************
   phone: primary
phonepro: mobile
  mobile: secondary

Consequently, I think that it's members/moremember.tt that needs to be corrected (and perhaps "Mobile" should be used as the label rather than "Other"?)
Comment 10 Marcel de Rooy 2014-07-31 12:31:43 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 12407 ***