[OPEN-ILS-DEV] Call Numbers for Serials in 2.0

[Dan Wells]

Hello Mike,

Thanks for weighing in.  I think there is overwhelming agreement about *what* data is needed for a sensible serials display.  There is mild disagreement about how best to store that data for optimal usability.  I strongly feel that an "analytic" (for lack of a better term, and e.g. "V.1", or "APR 2010") needs to be separate from the call number in a clear way, especially when it comes to sorting.  The decision to employ a unit 'label' was one way to accomplish this in a place which badly needs it (serials) while not interfering with the rest of the system.

I have been struggling to come up with code which allows for both while favoring neither approach, and I think it would lead to greater success if we focus on a single best approach instead.  I am content with this coming in 2.1 as long as we don't go too far down a "wrong" path in 2.0 such that large amounts of data will need to be adjusted manually (see my other email for a shorter-term solution).

Finally, I am not totally sure I understand this:

>The enforcement is my primary /technical/ concern.  There are
>identified use cases for not requiring this label, and so I don't
>think we can go requiring it.

>So the question is, can this be a nullable field?

I think an analytic can certainly be nullable, but I am not aware of use cases (other than a single unit) where it would make much sense.  Can you let me know what you are thinking here?

I would also like to again apologize for bringing this up at such a late stage.  I had been content in taking a very measured approach towards 2.0, and only today began to feel that we were a little too far apart on this issue to do nothing about it before 2.1.

Thanks again,
Dan


-- 
*********************************************************************************
Daniel Wells, Library Programmer Analyst dbw2 at calvin.edu
Hekman Library at Calvin College
616.526.7133