Stacey van Groll
My feedback
198 results found
-
13 votesStacey van Groll
supported this idea
·
Stacey van Groll
shared this idea
·
-
181 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
Note: BIRT is now deprecated as of the February 2019 release.
Stacey van Groll
shared this idea
·
-
190 votes
Dear community,
Thank you for raising this idea.
I would like to better understand the use case here:
1 How often such check is done? if this is a "cleanup" that is done once in a few month, for example, perhaps an analytics report would be sufficient?
2 In the description you wrote about the "has inventory" index. Can you give more details, why it is not useful for the described use case?
Thanks,
Tamar Fuches
Alma product team
Stacey van Groll
supported this idea
·
-
392 votesStacey van Groll
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
Like others have noted, this Idea is specifically for being able to search within an itemized set.
Nothing I can see in the comment by Itai, the linked documentation, or in the UI right now indicates that this is existing functionality.
The Alma UI displays the persistent search box at the top of the screen when looking at an itemised set, but this is misleading as it does not search as is desirable ie only in results of that set. Instead, it simply initiates a search across the whole repository as if you never chose to open that itemised set at all.
For example, I could have a saved itemised set of 5000 titles. I know that there is a single title of 'Passport' in this set that I want to remove. At the moment, I have to go page by page for a maximum of 50 results per page, until I find the page with 'Passport' and remove it. If I go to the top of the page to the persistent search box and do a title search on 'Passport', I get more than 100 records which are not all in this set, but are titles across the repository.
A good outcome of this idea - as I see it IMHO - would be that I could open my itemised set to see all the Members, go directly to the top of the page, use the persistent search box to search titles by 'Passport' which initiates a search just within this set, see the one result for my record in the set, and remove it. -
63 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
The OpenURL was added in April 2019, and Article Title and Book Title are also available (not sure from when though).
-
4 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
Hi, I'm interested in this idea as sometimes the free services don't offer sufficient metadata for good Link Resolver matching. Could you clarify if you are talking about the display of services from Alma in the View It, as that doesn't correlate to the 'search algorithm' for ranking of PCI citations which matches first on the bibliographic record as the CTO and then displays the services? The display of services in Alma is within local control, such as by hiding free sources when subscription services are available by GES rules.
-
2 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
This was fixed in the latest February 2019 release.
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
Hi Caroline,
I have a Published case in for this one: 00418011
It has been escalated to Development as an acknowledged defect.
No fix date yet unfortunately though.
Cheers, Stacey van Groll
Discovery and Access Coordinator
University of Queensland -
327 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
I'm not sure if this is what you're thinking, but Admins can change Alma colouring from the out of the box blue to one of several different options.
It does change it for the whole institution though, and some staff might object to some of the stronger colours such as red, as it's quite bold.
https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Product_Documentation/010Alma_Online_Help_(English)/050Administration/050Configuring_General_Alma_Functions/060User_Interface_Settings#Configuring_the_Alma_Logos.2C_Color_Scheme.2C_and_Privacy_Policy -
43 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
Hi,
Could you explain more, as when I do a Repository Search by Electronic Collection and then run the Export URLs job, I get a csv file with the Electronic Collections listed at the top with their 61 ID and URL and then - for instances where they have portfolios - the list of 53 IDs and URLs for the Portfolios. -
13 votes
Hello,
Most of the collections are available in the KBs.
The missing ones are:
- British Library Manuscripts Part I and II
- Luso-Brazilian History and Culture: Oliveira Lima Library I & II
- Early Arabic Printed Books Religion & Law
- Early Arabic Printed Books Science & History
- Early Arabic Printed Books Christian Literature
We will reach out to Gale to establish a feed for these collections.
Thanks for your support,
Tamar Ganor
Content Product Manager
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
You might have more luck with this one if you post it to the Content Idea Exchange.
-
1 vote
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
I believe that this is because your local FRBR record display is set to Generic and there could be different content types in the group, such as a DVD or streamed version of a work. If you changed it to preferred FRBR record display, it should display the content type from that dynamically chosen preferred record.
-
23 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
It's my understanding that Ex Libris does edit the collections to change them from Link in Record to Link Resolver, when possible, such as when a provider gives better data later.
They only use Link in Record when they have to ie "The Link in Record availability type is usually provided when the vendor cannot supply sufficient metadata for matching against holdings, or when it is the only way to reach the full text (for an image collection, for example). PC prefers to use the Link in Record method for free for delivery collections and for subscription collections when holdings matching cannot be used."
I would think that the issue with the example provided of Oxford Research Encyclopedias is that the citations don't have good data for Link Resolver matching eg ISSNs, so they've fallen back to Link in Record as the only option.
-
11 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
Hi, This is possible in Primo Back Office by using the AVA in a normalization rule to create a new facet. Are you perhaps on Primo VE?
-
32 votesStacey van Groll
supported this idea
·
-
41 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
Interesting! I hadn't noticed this before, and it's not very good :(
I agree that Alma changes are undesirable and I would think PCI data changes are unlikely given the scale, so the best option would seem to be to adjust the search index behaviour.
I found an example in our instance, and you're on the money that the PCI record includes the initial article in Sort, whereas Alma OTB norm rules strip it.
PCI
<display>
<title>The Power of Cities in Global Climate Politics: Saviours, Supplicants or Agents of Change?</title>
<sort>
<title>The Power of Cities in Global Climate Politics: Saviours, Supplicants or Agents of Change?</title>
Alma
<display>
<title>The power of cities in global climate politics : saviours, supplicants or agents of change? / Craig A. Johnson.</title>
<sort>
<title>power of cities in global climate politics : saviours, supplicants or agents of change? /</title> -
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
Hi - This option is already in place in Primo BO as of the May 2016 release, irrespective of UI.
https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Primo/Product_Documentation/030Highlights/047Primo_May_2016_Highlights#Ascending_Date_Sort_Option
Cheers, Stacey van Groll, University of Queensland -
13 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
Hi Luigi,
Thanks for providing more detail as to how you would like to see this working in practice. It helps to conceptualise it.
I'm stuck on the fact that local norm rules are for your own Primo database of millions at most, whereas PCI records are billions. Our expanded search is over 950,000,000. At the moment there is only one PCI server globally, with another coming on board hopefully soon. I would hazard a guess that part of the reason for only one / two is due to sheer size. But this idea has an outcome of every site locally storing a copy of each activated PCI record in their own Primo database. I can maybe see the Dedup / FRBR portion working on the Primo VE model, where these are dynamically grouped at query time, but I don't see how it would be possible for the Primo Back Office model where these are grouped at index time.
But this is definitely an IMHO response, and I could be way off the mark with my understanding of the underlying infrastructure and capacity variables in play.An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
Wow! That would be a big undertaking! Wouldn't that mean that each site is doing the work of the Ex Libris Primo Central Team individually? Would you have a pipe and a norm rule set for each collection? The mind boggles at the thought of how this would work in practice!
Cheers, Stacey van Groll, Discovery and Access Coordinator -
12 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
Hi James
Could you clarify if you referring to the ispartof field for PCI results, in the Brief Results and the Full Record Display?
Cheers, Stacey van Groll, University of Queensland -
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
I'm a bit confused by this one, as I would expect them all to be 'Full text available', and then the preferred record becomes irrelevant. If the preferred record has insufficient or uncorrect metadata, so that it fails to connect as expected via the Alma Link Resolver, that could be a problem. But I imagine that would be difficult to cause a change in the ranking as that may come into play later in the process for delivery. But I may be misinterpreting.
Cheers, Stacey van Groll, University of Queensland -
82 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
Hi,
I agree that’s not ideal at all. Adding the 245 c to the Title is one of the first things we configured locally during our Primo BO Implementation. I see from the guide that it is indeed hard coded and I believe the only option for adding MARC fields in VE at the moment is to create a whole new local field, which is obviously only useful in practice for completely new MARC fields not already hard coded, and especially not Title which is such a key one. This seems like a pretty clear cut use case for VE sites to be able to customise display. Out of curiosity, did Ex Libris suggest this Idea Exchange submission, Lori?
Cheers,
Stacey van Groll, University of QueenslandAn error occurred while saving the comment Stacey van Groll
commented
Hi Lori, I added the 245 subfield c to Display in our Alma normalization rules in the Primo Back Office. If you are not Total Care, you should be able to do this also, otherwise I believe Total Care sites can open a SalesForce case to ask for it to be done.
Cheers,
Stacey van Groll
University of Queensland
I would also like to add that my preferred development for this would be to do away with the Popular Searches SA completely and replace it with a new Search Strings SA. This should be on the same daily ETL as all the other SAs (unlike the monthly aggregation for Popular Searches), and offer all the other functionality of the other SAs such as granularity of date fields down to the search date by day.