Include "Quantity for Pricing" in EDI for ebook POLs
It is currently not possible to send the correct quantity to the vendor via EDI. When EDI is sent for POLs of type "Electronic book - one time", the quantity field in the EDI is always 1, even if the Alma POL has a different Quantity for Pricing value. We often need to order multiple "copies" (i.e. sets of access credits or user licences) for an ebook, but only want 1 portfolio on Alma.
Please consider using the "quantity for pricing" in EDI for electronic - one time POLs.
Dear Community,
This is to update you that we are developing the option to send the exact "Quantity for pricing" to the vendor via EDI, for electronic PO lines.
Additionally, we will add the "Access mode" field as an optional field to select for the "EDI Vendor Note Fields".
Please follow up on Alma Release Notes to see when this development is released.
Kind regards,
Zohar Shemesh
Alma Product Team
-
R Milne commented
Any ETA for this please?
-
François Renaville commented
Does anyone know when "Quantity for Pricing" is added in XML, EDI and APIs? Any ETA?
Concerning Yoel's comment from November 5, 2017:
"SIX: The “quantity for pricing” would be included in all API calls and xml integrations."
Can Ex Libris confirm that “quantity for pricing” will also be added in *Continuous* PO line types?Regards,
François
-
Victoria Farmer commented
Hello
Like Andrew we are very interested in this development and see it as hugely important as we often buy more than one copy of an eBook.
It would be great to hear when this development is planned for?
Thanks in advance.
Victoria
-
Andrew Brown commented
Hi Yoel,
Looking forward to this development! Our Acquisitions department asked today if it's been scheduled for a particular release yet?
Kind Regards,
Andrew
-
Fran Abbs commented
Hello Yoel,
My comments are as follows:
ONE - Yes, we agree that Quantity for Pricing and List Price should be used to calculate the total price for the Funding of a POL.
TWO - Can I suggest a slight amendment to this, please? Looking at the "New Order" import profile, I think we would like the following:
On the Inventory Information tab - the option (as already exists) to have "Single portfolio" or "Multiple portfolios" - if "Multiple portfolios" is selected, there could be an option to create x number of portfolios from a field mapped from the EOD, or based on the 856 fields in the incoming EOD record, as at present.
On the PO Line Information tab we would like an additional Quantity field which could be mapped from the incoming EOD record. This would work with the List Price field to calculate the Total Price for the POL created. This would give us the quantity for ordering but without the unnecessary duplicate portfolios.
THREE - Agreed, no changes needed to “Electronic Portfolio Editor”
FOUR - Yes, this is essential, the Quantity for Pricing should be taken from the Alma POL and included in the QTY field of the EDI for an electronic order.
FIVE - Yes, this should work in the same way as for physical POLs.
SIX - Yes, again we agree that this should be included with the same functionality as for physical POLs. If POLs are being created via API it would be nice to be able to have a Quantity added to the POL summary without creating duplicate portfolios.
I hope that makes sense!
Best wishes,
Fran
-
Tom Wicks commented
Hello Yoel - thank you for looking at this.
The main thing is the quantity updating the pricing (ONE), and the quantity being sent to the vendor in the EDI file (FOUR).
We don't necessarily need multiple portfolios created, as they'd all be linking to the same resource. However, we can easily deal with that if it's a side effect of implementing this much needed change!
Kind regards,
Tom
-
Thank you everybody for your comments.
Here is a new summary based on everyone's comments.
I will wait a few days for any objections / approvals / etc. then assume this is the final request.ONE
The “Quantity for pricing” field already exists in the PO Line Summary tab and can be edited at the time of creating a manual order.
If the “List price” is “20” and the “Quantity for pricing” is “2” then automatically the amount in the ‘Funding” section will change to “40”.
When this POL is added to an invoice line then the “quantity” field of the invoice line automatically changes to “2”.TWO
This field “Quantity for pricing” does not exist in the “Inventory” tab of an import profile of type “New Order” when the “Inventory Operation” is defined as “Electronic”.
It would need to be defined there with both an option to add a default and an option to take it from a bibliographic field / subfield (as is the case for other values in this section).
For physcial items there is a field "Number of items field" and also an option to put in a default.
For electronic inventory there would beed to be a parallel field "Number of portfolios field" and also an option to put in a default.THREE
No change will be made in the “Electronic Portfolio Editor”FOUR
The QTY (quantity) field of the EDI order would be applicable not only for physical items but also for electronic portfolios.
This QTY field appears in the EDI order and is explained along with the other EDI order fields at
https://developers.exlibrisgroup.com/alma/integrations/edi/po
Any comments on this?FIVE
The QTY (quantity) field of the EDI invoice would be applicable not only for physical items but also for electronic portfolios.
The QTY multiplied by the PRI (item price) and would directly influence the MOA+79 (total line item amounts).
These EDI invoice fields are explained at
https://developers.exlibrisgroup.com/alma/integrations/edi/invoice
Any comments on this?SIX
The “quantity for pricing” would be included in all API calls and xml integrations. -
Anonymous commented
Our current workarounds are time consuming.
-
Anonymous commented
Seems a simple adjustment...?
-
Bertrand Daldy commented
I have been aware of this issue for a while and we have to do a workaround each time. The problem is becoming more acute as I have noticed that in our institution we seem to ordering multiple copies of the same e-book more frequently. It would be great to this resolved
-
[Deleted User] commented
Hi,
Yes I agree, option 4 from **** is exactly what we would like to see."The QTY (quantity) field of the EDI order would be applicable not only for physical items but also for electronic portfolios."
Many thanks,
***** -
Tom Wicks commented
Yes please to Yoel's option four - currently we have some fiddly workarounds in place to deal with this.
-
AN - UNSW commented
We have only recently found there was problem with the quantity of an eBook ordered via EDI not showing the number of copies we required. This means we have to organise some way for the vendor to know we want multiple copies of an eBook when we order, all a bit time consuming.
Option 4 as outlined by Yoel is exactly what is needed, there should be not differences if you are ordering physical or electronic multiple copies.
Would love to see this happen.
-
paul wei commented
Many Thanks Fran, and Yoel
We also have the similar problem wanting to buy multiple access on one order via vendor’s platform. But we’d hope to have the option to create multiple portfolios in the E Import Profile based on the EOD information provided by vendor.
In Australia, the industry standard CAUL requires us to count how many “None Serial Items (including Ebooks)” we purchase each year. To be able to count, additional portfolios (we can have them supressed) seems to be the way to count.
So the context is this
e.g. if libraries initially held 1 None-linear access - and due to high demands, or large “turned away” users stats for example, we are required to purchase, say 3 more 3users type access. (for 9 additional concurrent users).
When we use ProQuest’s platform to buy, ProQuest’s EOD would indicate in the usual 980$g field “3”, meaning 3 copies for this order, but ALMA’s Electronic Import Profile cannot map this as an order for “3” “electronic copies” for 3users access each – and hence, created an POL for one inventory, priced for one, and we’ll have to fix order before the EDI comes. We have a case in #00238477.
In short, I think it is important for libraries to be able to keep track of how many – access, and what type of access (e.g. 3 copies of 3users, 1 copy of None Linear) we bought over time.
Many thanks
Paul
-
Fran Abbs commented
Hi Yoel,
In response to your comments:
One
Yes, the amount in the funding section should reflect list price X quantity for pricing. Likewise, the quantity on the invoice line should reflect the quantity for pricing in the POL.Two
I'm not sure why this is necessary - Repository imports don't relate to POL creation. I was only referring to the Quantity for Pricing in the POL, which is editable, but always present in the EDI Order as 1 regardless of the value in the POL. For ebooks, we don't want the Quantity for Pricing to have any impact on Inventory at all. Only 1 portfolio is needed.If you were referring to EOD "New Order" imports, in such a scenario we would only want a single portfolio to be created, with the Quantity for Pricing being reflected in the field of the POL.
Three
No, the field doesn't need to exist in the Electronic Portfolio. The existing link to the POL is enough. We only need Quantity for Pricing in the POLFour
YES!!! This is what we would like. For the EDI Order to take the Quantity for Pricing from the POL for ebooks and use it in the QTY field, in the same way that it does for Print POLs.FIve
Yes, the Quantity for Pricing should behave for ebook invoices as it does for print book invoices. If the vendor is picking up the quantity from the EDI order, this should be reflected in the EDI invoice from the vendor and any influence that this has on imported invoices and pricing should work as it currently does for print POLs,Six
Although we are not using APIs for ebook orders, I believe that wherever an API or xml integration uses Quantity for Pricing for a print POL, it should do the same for the ebook POL. EXCEPT that it shouldn't create multiple portfolios (where it would create multiple items for a print POL).I hope that helps!
Fran
-
Hello. Following up on the previous comments would the following suffice and appear as an appropriate way to handle this?
Below is a proposed explanation of how the “quantity for pricing” would behave for EDI and other acquisition workflows as well as request for comments.ONE
The “Quantity for pricing” field already exists in the PO Line Summary tab and can be edited at the time of creating a manual order.
If the “List price” is “20” and the “Quantity for pricing” is “2” then automatically the amount in the ‘Funding” section will change to “40”.
When this POL is added to an invoice line then the “quantity” field of the invoice line automatically changes to “2”.TWO
This field “Quantity for pricing” does not exist in the “E Book Mapping” section of an import profile of type “Repository” when the “Inventory Operation” is defined as “Electronic”.
It would need to be defined there with both an option to add a default and an option to take it from a bibliographic field / subfield (as is the case for other values in this section).
Any comments on this?THREE
In the “Electronic Portfolio Editor” in the “Portfolio Information” tab this field also does not exist.
Would it be desired to add there or is the existing link to the POL sufficient?
(The field called “Quantity for pricing” does not exist in the physical item editor but there it has a different purpose where it specifically actual means “number of items”).FOUR
The QTY (quantity) field of the EDI order would be applicable not only for physical items but also for electronic portfolios.
This QTY field appears in the EDI order and is explained along with the other EDI order fields at
https://developers.exlibrisgroup.com/alma/integrations/edi/po
Any comments on this?FIVE
The QTY (quantity) field of the EDI invoice would be applicable not only for physical items but also for electronic portfolios.
The QTY multiplied by the PRI (item price) and would directly influence the MOA+79 (total line item amounts).
These EDI invoice fields are explained at
https://developers.exlibrisgroup.com/alma/integrations/edi/invoice
Any comments on this?SIX
The “quantity for pricing” would be included in all API calls and xml integrations.Have a nice day,
Yoel Kortick
Senior Librarian
T: +972-2-6499369
M: +972-54-7136408
Yoel.Kortick@exlibrisgroup.com
www.exlibrisgroup.com -
Carol Avorgbedor commented
Hi Yoel, I would agree with Fran in that we (Univ. of Manchester) purely want to enter a quantity to tell our vendor how many of the chosen model we wish to purchase. Bringing licensing into it seems to complicate what should, hopefully, be a very simple purchasing issue.
-
Fran Abbs commented
Hi Yoel,
1. We use EDI to communicate with our vendors, so for us this is the key issue, but I would assume that if other forms of communication are used, the quantity would need to be reflected in the same way.2. I don't think that this is a licensing issue. The problem that we have is the communication to the vendor that we want to order more than 1, whether that be more than 1 concurrent user, or more than 1 batch of "credits" to access a title. At Sheffield we're not currently using the license functionality in Alma so I'm not very familiar with it, but I presume that license information stored on Alma isn't transmitted to vendors. We are simply trying to send an order to the vendor for more than 1 of whatever access model the vendor offers for the title, so that we can be invoiced accordingly, but just have a single portfolio on Alma. Does that make sense? If I've misunderstood Alma licensing, please let me know. Thanks.
-
Thank you for this suggestion. We would like to further inquire as follows:
1. The title of the idea mentions EDI. We are assuming from the text of the suggestion that this is not unique to EDI. Correct?
2. As you allude to in the comment, there is not an option to order multiple "copies" of an e-book because "electronic" by its very nature does not have "copies". Rather, there may be licensing and accessing issues related to the resource. In some cases it may be number of concurrent users, while in other cases it may be a period in which the resource is available (from date to date), while still in other cases it may be the total time the resource may be accessed (presumably what is referred to in the suggestion as "access credits"). Thus the question we have here is should this actually be handled via a license which would be an associated or additional POL connected to the "one time POL"? This would appear to actually be a licensing issue and best handled by using a license.