Suggestions endpoint RFC

From Koha Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Home
Koha > Technical > Development > RFCs

This RFC should be the basis for making the suggestions endpoint follow the guidelines. Bug report has already been filed Bug 17314

Actions and routes

The following table presents the current implementation, and the proposed changes.

Description Action Proposed path
List suggestions
 GET
 /suggestions
Add a suggestion
 POST
 /suggestions
Get a suggestion
 GET
 /suggestions/{suggestion_id}
Overwrite a suggestion
 PUT
 /suggestions/{suggestion_id}
Delete a suggestion
 DELETE
 /suggestions/{suggestion_id}

suggestion object definition

DB schema Liliputech Katrin tcohenashimema
suggestionid suggestion_id
suggestedby suggested_by suggesting_user_id suggestor_id
suggesteddate suggestion_date
managedby managed_by managing_user_id manager_id
manageddate managed_date
accepteddate accepted_date accepting_user_id acceptor_id
rejectedby rejected_by rejector_id
rejectiondate rejected_date
STATUS status
note note notes notes
author author
title title
copyrightdate copyright_date publication_year (hide internal inconsistency)
publishercode publisher_code publisher (see biblioitems)
date date_created creation_date updated_on
volumedesc volume_desc volume
publicationyear publication_year publication_year (see above and comment below)
place publication_place
isbn isbn
biblionumber biblio_id
reason reason library_reply
patronreason patron_reason
budgetid budget_id fund_id
branchcode library_id
collectiontitle collection_title series
itemtype item_type
quantity quantity
currency currency
price item_price list_price
total total_price

Comments

--Kfischer 01:52, 30 July 2019 (EDT)

  • You have suggestion_date but rejected_date as a little inconsistency.
  • Instead of date_created, use creation_date? (see holds, items ,and other endpoints for comparison)
  • Instead of item_price, maybe we should use just price or 'unit_price'?
  • I am not sure about the term collection_title - it appears in the GUI too in some spots too and has caused some confusion in translation. I wonder if this should be series instead, which we use in other places.
  • Are we sure copyrightdate and publicationyear are both used in Koha in this table? (I know they are in biblio/biblioitems, but not sure for suggestions)
  • publisher_code doesn't really fit what we put in there, I'd prefer publisher (see Bug 11195)

--tcohen 9 January 2020 (EDT)

  • publisher_code should be mapped into publisher, see the biblios endpoint.

--Kfischer 17:55, 12 January 2020 (EST) When you look at someting again, new things come up:

  • suggested_by, managed_by, rejected_by all will all contain 'patron_ids'. I think it would be good to indicate this in the name somehow by using _id. Maybe: suggestor_id, rejector_id, manager_id OR suggesting_user_id, rejecting_user_id, managing_user_id?
  • reason = library_reply? Just an idea, as there is always a bit of confusion between patron_reason and reason.
  • Still think we need to resolve publication_year/copyrightdate. I think this comes form the different mappings in UNIMARC/MARC21 - but should we make this inconsistency visible to the outside world? Why not just have publication_year and fill in whatever is mapped in the installation in question.
Personal tools