[Koha-bugs] [Bug 7547] Printing a sorted cart
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=7547 --- Comment #8 from Katrin Fischer --- This seems to work well, but I want to check the other changed pages still. Something I notices on the printout is that the printing runs into the footers/headers in Firefox and there is only very little to no margin on the left and right. Not sure if we can do something about this, seems similar with the existing print feature. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 15395] Internationalization: plural forms, context, and more
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=15395 --- Comment #91 from Julian Maurice --- Created attachment 76330 --> https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=76330&action=edit Bug 15395: Fix translation when text contains non-ASCII characters msgid, msgid_plural and msgctxt need to be utf8-encoded Also, remove call to Locale::Messages->select_package which is not needed anymore -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 15395] Internationalization: plural forms, context, and more
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=15395 --- Comment #89 from Julian Maurice --- Created attachment 76328 --> https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=76328&action=edit Bug 15395: Keep JS translations separated from others It saves the browser from downloading a whole ~1Mib JSON file where 99% of it will only be used on the server side. The downside of this is that if the same strings appear in templates and in JS files, they will have to be translated twice. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 15395] Internationalization: plural forms, context, and more
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=15395 --- Comment #90 from Julian Maurice --- Created attachment 76329 --> https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=76329&action=edit Bug 15395: Extract strings from TT BLOCKs too -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 13153] Waiting hold checked in at different library doesn't re-route item to correct library
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=13153 --- Comment #21 from Hugh Rundle --- (In reply to Martha Fuerst from comment #20) > Bug bump? Just confirming that we applied this patch on 16.11 in a 5-branch library service several months ago and it appears to have fixed the substantive problem. Would be great to do the pop-up message cleanup for 18.11 but maybe that should be split into a new bug? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 16488] UNIMARC to MARC21 xslt to be used in z39.50 import sources
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=16488 Serhij Dubyk changed: What|Removed |Added CC||du...@ukr.net -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 20987] Attach existing item to order/basket
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=20987 giuseppe.angile...@ct.infn.it changed: What|Removed |Added CC||giuseppe.angile...@ct.infn. ||it -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 20987] New: Attach existing item to order/basket
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=20987 Bug ID: 20987 Summary: Attach existing item to order/basket Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: new feature Priority: P5 - low Component: Acquisitions Assignee: koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org Reporter: giuseppe.angile...@ct.infn.it QA Contact: testo...@bugs.koha-community.org It would be helpful to associate existing items to an order. Usually, when an order is added to a basket, a new item is created. I would like to have the possibility to "attach" existing items to orders/baskets. Existing information such as price, replacement price, source of acquisition should be used to populate the order. (Motivation: I've started using Koha's Acquisition module in my library only much after using Koha to catalogue records and circulate items. I would like to reconstruct past acquisitions in a consistent way, at least for those items for which acquisition details are available.) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 18309] UNIMARC update from IFLA
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=18309 --- Comment #26 from François Pichenot --- TO DO on unimarc biblio : - checking if (sub)fields are mandatory or repeatable. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 18309] UNIMARC update from IFLA
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=18309 --- Comment #25 from François Pichenot --- Created attachment 76327 --> https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=76327&action=edit Unimarc biblio (French) default export You can check the correctness of the French Unimarc biblio framework with this export. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 18309] UNIMARC update from IFLA
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=18309 François Pichenot changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #72855|0 |1 is obsolete|| -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 18309] UNIMARC update from IFLA
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=18309 François Pichenot changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #72825|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #24 from François Pichenot --- Created attachment 76326 --> https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=76326&action=edit Bug 18309: Unimarc update from IFLA - Unimarc Biblio (French) - corrections suggested by Laurent integrated, - 'unimarc_182c' values corrected, - 'unimarc_183a' values conformed to http://multimedia.bnf.fr/unimarcb_trad/RDA-FR-types-supports.pdf -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. ___ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
[Koha-bugs] [Bug 18309] UNIMARC update from IFLA
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=18309 --- Comment #23 from François Pichenot --- Hi Laurent, Thank you very much and sorry for the late reply... > 009 ARK perennial identifier of the record [obsolete since version 2007] > ARK = Archival Resource Key / This is a Bnf Specific Zone > . See ARK specifications: http://www.cdlib.org/inside/diglib/ark/arkspec.pdf > [accessed October 10, 2006] > ex: 009http: //catalogue.bnf.fr/ark: / 12148 / cb375475483 BnF doesn't use 009 anymore (since 2016, see http://www.bnf.fr/documents/unimarc_b_recap_modif.pdf p.6). But 009 seems to be useful to store Sudoc PPN (as 035 is a repeatable field), so I added it. > Add the following subfield: $ 010 9 which is a field put forward by the ABES > as part of the Sudoc network. The information of Sudoc is the following > UNIMARC / Bibliographic > Field 010: export of subfield $ 9 (repeatable): "ISBN of a serial delivery" > This Sudoc-specific subfield is likely to be present in periodical records. > It contains the ISBN of a periodical delivery > when it is processed in the > Sudoc in the collector's state under the note of the periodical concerned. OK > Block 181 except that the $ 181 a must be repeatable OK > Block 183 = 183 $ P sub-field specific to ABES and Sudoc network 183 $P doesn't appear in Sudoc exchange format (see http://www.abes.fr/Media/Fichiers/Sudoc-Fichiers/Produire-dans-le-Sudoc/Format-d-echange-des-donnees-bibliographiques) > 183 $ 8 under IFLA specific field obviously missing OK > Block 219 = OK but specific to Sudoc of ABES; This field is included in BnF exchange format (see http://www.bnf.fr/documents/unimarc_b_recap_modif.pdf p22) but not appears in Sudoc exchange format. So I correct the field tag. > Attention misses $ 219 $ 6 and $ 7, under fields reserved for cataloging > documents with non-Latin characters. Also note that $ 219 $ P $ r $ s and $ 6 > and $ 7 are non-repeatable subfields (to be corrected) This is not included in an exchange format. > Block 231 new since 2017: does not exist at Bnf and ABES Sudoc > All sub fields are repeatable so correct OK > Block 283 new since 2017: does not exist at BnF and ABES Sudoc > Lack $ 8Material specific, repeatable OK > Bloc 338 new 2017: does not exist at BnF and ABES Sudoc > Be careful and correct: $ b, $ c and $ e are repeatable! OK > Block 915 specific to ABES Sudoc > Be careful the $ a and $ b are repeatable (to correct) OK > Block 916 no longer exists at ABES Sudoc (to be deleted? if it do not exist > in IFLA) Are you sure ? 916 still appears in Sudoc exchange format (see http://www.abes.fr/Media/Fichiers/Sudoc-Fichiers/Produire-dans-le-Sudoc/Format-d-echange-des-donnees-bibliographiques p.71) > Bloc 918 specific to the BNF Are you sure ? 918 still appears in Sudoc exchange format (see http://www.abes.fr/Media/Fichiers/Sudoc-Fichiers/Produire-dans-le-Sudoc/Format-d-echange-des-donnees-bibliographiques p.71) > Field 930 > Missing subfield $ j "PEB code" that is specific to ABES Sudoc / > non-repeatable > Missing subfield $ v "Copy status code" that is specific to ABES Sudoc / > non-repeatable > Missing subfield $ Z "Shared Conservation Plan Code" that is specific to ABES > Sudoc / Repeatable > Missing the subfield $ p "Conservation pole or associated pole in the context > of a PCPP" that is specific to the ABES Sudoc / non-repeatable OK > Add the entire block 931 (Sudoc block of the abes) that is missing in the > document is $ 5, $ 2, $ a, $ b, $ c, $ d, $ e, $ g, $ h, $ i, $ l, $ v / all > are non-repeatable / for labels see > http://documentation.abes.fr/sudoc/formats/loc/zones/931.htm OK > This comment deals with the 932 that was proposed to delete > Why remove the 932 zone that seems useful for the ABES (sudoc) This field is not included in Sudoc exchange format (see http://www.abes.fr/Media/Fichiers/Sudoc-Fichiers/Produire-dans-le-Sudoc/Format-d-echange-des-donnees-bibliographiques) > All block 955 (used by ABES sudoc) is to be reviewed because it lacks > subfields like this: $ =, $ 0, $ 1, $ 2, $ 3, $ 4, Field conformed to Sudoc exchange format (see http://www.abes.fr/Media/Fichiers/Sudoc-Fichiers/Produire-dans-le-Sudoc/Format-d-echange-des-donnees-bibliographiques p72) > Block 956 Field conformed to Sudoc exchange format (see http://www.abes.fr/Media/Fichiers/Sudoc-Fichiers/Produire-dans-le-Sudoc/Format-d-echange-des-donnees-bibliographiques p72) > Block 957 > All block 957 (used by Sudoc of ABES) is to be reviewed because it lacks > subfields like this: $ -, $ 0, $ 1, $ 2, $ 3, $ 4, $ 7, $ n, $ p, $ q / them > $ 1, $ 2, $ 3, $ 4 and $ 7 are non-repeatable unlike others > Remove $ h, $ i, $ j, $ r, $ w, and $ z > http://documentation.abes.fr/sudoc/formats/loc/zones/957.htm Field conformed to *Commentary 16 Block 958 = OK > Bloc 959 has just been added by Sudoc ABES > Any good but addition of a $ r that does not exist at the level of the ABES? 959 $r occurs in Sudoc exchange format (s
