[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and potential copies

scott.thomas at sparkpa.org scott.thomas at sparkpa.org
Tue Nov 28 08:30:35 EST 2017

Another interesting issue was raised in this discussion. Our consortium is all proximity because we were told that, if org units within a consortium plan to resource share, they must all be FIFO or proximity, but it appears some of you are hybrids. Can I assume you do not resource share at all or do not do so beyond the local library system?

Thank you,

Scott Thomas
Executive Director
(717) 873-9461
scott.thomas at sparkpa.org<mailto:scott.thomas at sparkpa.org>
[Description: Description: Training | SPARK – Pennsylvania's Statewide Library System]<http://www.palibrary.org/pails/>

From: Open-ils-general [mailto:open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Diane Disbro
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2017 8:30 PM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group <open-ils-general at list.georgialibraries.org>; ME list serv <Evergreen at lists.mobiusconsortium.org>
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and potential copies

I am very interested to hear if someone has done something with this other than try to explain to disgruntled patrons why they see in their online account that they are next in the queue for an item but they wait weeks or months to get it.

Thank you, Josh, for asking.

Diane Disbro
Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager
Union Branch
Scenic Regional Library
308 Hawthorne Drive
Union, MO     63084
(636) 583-3224

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Josh Stompro <stomproj at exchange.larl.org<mailto:stomproj at exchange.larl.org>> wrote:
Hello, Those of you that use age hold protection and non FIFO best hold selection sort order, what have you done with the status column of holds in your catalog.  We just noticed that it is showing the FIFO queue position for holds, along with all potential copies.  This gives users bad info since for us holds are sometimes filled in FIFO order for some orgs, and are filled based on proximity for other locations.  And since one org uses age hold protection, the total copy count isn’t accurate either since half the copies might be age hold protected so they cannot fill the users holds.

Did you just remove that section from templates/opac/parts/hold_status.tt2?  Did you modify it in some way?  I would like to see examples of what you changed it to if you changed it.

Should the potential copies count exclude copies that are age hold protected and cannot be captured for that hold?  Right now it pulls from hold copy map, but it looks like restricting the copy count based on the age hold protection might be possible to add.


Lake Agassiz Regional Library - Moorhead MN larl.org<http://larl.org>
Josh Stompro     | Office 218.233.3757 EXT-139<tel:(218)%20233-3757>
LARL IT Director | Cell 218.790.2110<tel:(218)%20790-2110>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20171128/b943c11a/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1140 bytes
Desc: image003.jpg
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20171128/b943c11a/attachment-0001.jpg>

More information about the Open-ils-general mailing list