Collection location documentation: Difference between revisions

JMojica (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 19: Line 19:
*** Agreed! This is also why I think where possible we should shift the s_dispo contents to the same name so the same meta table can supply both. I want to discuss how to best encode this with you, hopefully tomorrow at out wiki meeting. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 15:14, 2022 February 8 (CST)
*** Agreed! This is also why I think where possible we should shift the s_dispo contents to the same name so the same meta table can supply both. I want to discuss how to best encode this with you, hopefully tomorrow at out wiki meeting. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 15:14, 2022 February 8 (CST)
**** I need the s_dispo because I am using the other columns as various categories of  the detailed numeric locations name and I do not want to drop it for now.  I have yet to see the meta data table you are talking about to decide.  
**** I need the s_dispo because I am using the other columns as various categories of  the detailed numeric locations name and I do not want to drop it for now.  I have yet to see the meta data table you are talking about to decide.  
***** Sorry didn't say that clearly. Don't mean to eliminate [[s_dispo table]] at this time, just want to make sure we use same location name as in [[Boarding Loc]] where applicable, so we can store the metadata all in one table. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 13:36, 2022 February 9 (CST)
}}
}}