Skip to content

Alma

Your feedback matters to us. Help us improve Alma by telling us what you’d like to see using the message areas below. You can also can support something already posted.

We would love to be able to respond to every idea that is submitted, but this is not feasible. We are, however, committed to responding to the most popular ideas—those that have received the most points.

For more information please review our FAQ and guidelines. Thank you.

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback

52 results found

  1. Duplicate Title Analysis should include match option for Unique OCLC number match method

    The Duplicate Title Analysis job and report currently include matching on only one attribute at a time, rather than on all of the attributes that might be covered by a given match rule. For instance, matching on system number provides only matches between 035$a in different records, while the Unique OCLC number match method covers both 035$a and 035$z. As a result the duplicate title analysis report is missing records that would otherwise be found by an import profile or the match method in the network zone.

    26 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  2. Indication rule that checks if subfields are in the same field

    Currently it is not possible to write an indication rule which checks the subfield a and b of a field only when both subfields are in the same field and not in repeated fields of the same record. Both of the following records are treated the same when looking for a subfield a "mercury" and subfield b "venus" in the 690 field:

    Record 1:
    690 $$a mercury $$b venus

    Record 2:
    690 $$a mercury $$b mars
    690 $$a earth $$b venus

    I'd appreciate an option to distinguish if I'm looking for subfields in different fields or in the same field.…

    65 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  3. New Metadata Editor templates: editing template v. creating new record

    Previously, when opening a template in the classic Metadata Editor (MDE), a click on the template name from the list of templates would give a list of options, including creating a new record: there was no doubt as to whether you were creating a new record from the template, or editing the template itself.

    However, with the new MDE, clicking on the template name takes you straight into editing the template itself. Creating a new record from the template now requires a right click first to get to the options menu, but this is not at all obvious. It is…

    71 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  4. The text font ,font size and color of Metadata Editor

    1.When using Metadata Editor, the font size and color of the editing area are not friendly to the editor.

    2.The text in the editing area needs to be enlarged by 150% in the browser to make it convenient for users to work for a long time

    3.The text color or font in the editing area causes the black text to look like gray, which makes it inconvenient to check the bibliography

    4.Can workers modify the Metadata Editor environment to make them comfortable working environment, such as the font size, font type, and font color in the editing area?

    This can…

    74 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  5. Visibility of extension packs and possibility of selecting them one by one for editing and/or deleting

    Extension packs once added to a local MARC-based profile are not visible and cannot be retrieved in any way. It would be much better if each extension pack loaded to a bibliographic profile could be visible to system admnistrators in order to be downloaded from bibliographic profile for purposes of editing and reloading, should the need arise. This feature was part of the tentative future developments proposed by Ex libris back in 2017 (see: internal: 2017 Q1 URM-45100)

    67 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  6. Metadata Editor should add the year automatically to the 866 field

    Currently the Metadata editor does not add automatically the year to the 866 field. If we want the year to be in our 866 we have to add it manually. Actually this is the only way our patrons can see the year in Primo.

    69 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  7. Mechanism to validate binary MARC record structure

    There is currently no mechanism within Alma to ensure that exported or published binary MARC records have valid record structures. Even though Alma uses MARCXML and is not impacted internally by invalid binary MARC, libraries must still provide binary MARC records to external entities in the course of regular business (vendors, outsourcers, agencies, other stakeholders).

    Structurally invalid binary MARC records significantly hamper data sharing for libraries. A third party application, MarcEdit, can be used to validate MARC record structure, but since our data is stored in Alma, there should be a mechanism native to Alma that validates binary MARC structure…

    67 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  8. Bibliographic records editing history

    Here is an enhancement request concerning bibliographic records editing history.

    Currently, the "View Versions" can only tell the different version of a bib. record. However, this cannot tell logging history of updating/editing the bib. records, e.g. who add/remove a MARC fields/who suppressed/released the bib. record etc. This is no history tab to keep tracking the changes of a bib. record which is unlike other history tab functionality available in other Alma pages, e.g.

    • The PO Line Summary page when editing a PO line
    • The Physical Item Editor page when editing item records
    • The License Terms Details page…

    135 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  9. Preferred term correction - correct coding when flipping LCSH to LCGFT

    When a 655 field is coded for LCSH and matches a non-preferred term in LCGFT, Alma flips the heading to the preferred LCGFT term but does not update the coding (it should change the 2nd ind to 7 and add $2 lcgft).

    The problem is limited to cases where:

    A bib heading 655/_0 matches a non-preferred term in an LCGFT authority

    What happens is:

    The PTC job flips the heading to the LCGFT preferred form, but it does not change the 2nd-indicator from 0 to 7, and does not add $2lcgft

    What is not a problem:

    655/0 headings that

    77 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  10. search filters and better results display in the "search external resources" function

    When we are searching WorldCat for a record to match a newly-ordered title, we often find duplicate records. The current search results display makes it difficult and time-consuming to choose the best record.

    The external resources search would be much improved if we could limit search results by the language of cataloging (040 |b) and format. This would save us having to wade through multiple vendor records that aren't even in our local language of cataloging, and multiple records for resources in a format other than the one we are looking for.

    It would save us a lot of time…

    97 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  11. Reminders : extend the Add reminder functionality to other roles (only Cataloger now)

    Reminders functionality could be more effective if extended to other roles than only cataloger role. At least Electronic and Physical inventory operators should be able to add a reminder on a Bib record in a repository search result.
    The managing of reminders from Cataloging menu can be limited to catalogers.

    82 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  12. Ability to select records to release from MD editor

    Cataloger can release 1 record per time or all records can be released, but it would be useful catalogers could select multiples records to release.

    103 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
1 3 Next →
  • Don't see your idea?