[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Towards more consistent terminology in the web client

[Janet Schrader]

+1 to holdings.
I like that because it's consistent with "Holdings transfer" and can be
either a copy or a volume. Holdings should be familiar to any librarian who
used MARC record loads to create items 852 or 94x fields.



Janet Schrader

Bibliographic Services Supervisor | CW MARS

67 Millbrook Street, Suite 201, Worcester, MA 01606

P: 508-755-3323 x 325 | F: 508-757-7801

------------------------------

jschrader at cwmars.org  ||  http;//cwmars.org <http://www.cwmars.org/>


On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Sarah Childs <sarahc at zionsvillelibrary.org>
wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Elaine Hardy <ehardy at georgialibraries.org>
> wrote:
>
>> I do like Holdings transfer. I think it is a good descriptor of what we
>> are doing with the functionality.
>>
>> A little quibble, though with not having the button labelled Add volumes
>> and copies. I realize that is cumbersome, however, it is more descriptive,
>> especially from a cataloger's point of view.
>>
>
> Maybe it should be labeled "Add Holdings"?   Then it's distinct from both
> Add Volumes and Add Copies.
>
>
> --
> Sarah Childs
> Technical Services Department Head
> Hussey-Mayfield Memorial Public Library
> 250 North Fifth Street
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=250+North+Fifth+Street+%0D%0AZionsville,+IN+46077&entry=gmail&source=g>
> Zionsville, IN 46077
> 317-873-3149 x13330
> sarahc at zionsvillelibrary.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20180809/902b2891/attachment.html>