Calculation of due date for recalled lending requests should be consistent with fulfillment loan recalls.
When setting recall period on a fulfillment loan to "No recall due date", the original due date is kept, while renewal of the recalled loan is blocked.
For some reason, a different logic is applied to lending requests. Setting "No recall due date" as the recall period policy for lending requests, results in the due date being set to the date of the recall. The result is unpredictability for the borrower.
We propose that that these two very similar workflows are better alligned and that setting "no recall period" for recall should result in no change to the due date on a recalled lending request.
Unit – The Norwegian Directorate for ICT and Joint Services in Higher Education and Research
Audun Skorstad commented
While that does produce the desired results, it is a workaround and also makes little logical sense. I believe that it is important for the Alma config to be as comprehensible and consistent as possible. This really should be configurable ootb and not require a workaround.
I am still of the opinion that new due date calculation for rs requests and ful loans should be the same. Either based on the loan date ( shipped date for a rs requests) or on the recall date as it is for ful loans today. In any case "no recall due date" for either workflow, shod produce the same outcomes. Again, it is the exact same action on closely related workflows
If you set a recall period of many days (say 1000), would that not result in no change in the due date when recalling ?
Reidar Bjorvatn commented
Fulfillment loans at Agder University Library are reduced with up to ten days from the request date. (Books that are already requested, can only be borrowed for seven days). We support the suggestion that lending in resource sharing should be better alligned with fulfillment loans and with several options for configuration.