Configuring Alma to deliver an exclusively off-campus service in response to the Coronavirus pandemic included the extension of due dates for us. We were thankful for the 'Bulk Change Due Dates' functionality, which we were able to use to push back the due dates of a majority of items on loan (until 1 June in the first instance for us). We encountered problems though when it came to any items borrowed by patrons whose records were due to expire before that date. The items wouldn't go beyond the patrons' expiry dates, which under normal circumstances would be exactly how we would have Alma work, but in this situation was inconvenient and required us to do a manual workaround. Likewise, the due dates of any items on loan that had been recalled due to policy (e.g. having reached the end of the maximum renewal period) or requests were not extended, so again we had to deal with those separately.

Recognising that the way Bulk Change Due Dates works currently is suitable for Alma users probably a majority of the time, could tick-box options such as 'Disregard patron record expiry dates' and 'Include recalled items' be added to that screen please?

We are disappointed with the technical support service provided by Ex Libris. We strongly believe that Ex Libris should provide customers with more effective, prompt and interactive service.

There should be an option to call or chat online in real time with a support person who has a sound understanding of the product in question. This would be in line with all system vendors we have previously dealt with.

We appreciate that there will be some issues that are designated as bugs or enhancements and will require more in depth investigation. However, a direct call/chat option with a properly trained support analyst would quickly and efficiently separate these issues from more general product queries. We are aware that there are many call-logging options used widely by other companies, such as FastCall, TenFold and RingDNA, which can be used to allow customer calls/chats to be registered directly in Salesforce. We believe that Ex Libris should implement this improvement as soon as possible.

Please vote to show your support for this idea and feel free to add comments relating to your experience of this issue.

I originally posted the idea https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173-alma/suggestions/16880380-add-oadoi-org-as-an-option-in-uresolver which was implemented in the Alma November release.

It looks like it's implemented the feature exactly as I suggested – unfortunately the method I suggested turns out to be exactly wrong for the use case as I (admitted briefly) described it! :-{

Our use case, more specifically, is that when we don’t have full text for an item but an OA version is available through Unpaywall, we want that Unpaywall option to appear very visibly for users. (Being a bit fuzzy on the relationship between uResolver, GetIt, ViewIt, and when these all appear) I suggested doing it through uResolver. But that puts it into ViewIt, and ViewIt only appears when we do have full-text.

So eg https://library-lincoln-sb.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid=TNcambridgeS0007485399000437&context=PC&vid=LU&lang=enUS&searchscope=Allresources&adaptor=primocentralmultiplefe&tab=defaulttab&query=any,contains,Mitochondrial%20COI%20and%20II%20provide%20useful%20markers%20for%20Wiseana&offset=0 we have the full-text so don’t need an OA version, but the Unpaywall link appears.

Whereas https://library-lincoln-sb.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid=TNmedline22342531&context=PC&vid=LU&lang=enUS&searchscope=Allresources&adaptor=primocentralmultiplefe&tab=defaulttab&query=any,contains,drosophila%20genetics&offset=0&pcAvailability=true we don’t subscribe to the full-text, so we want to provide OA. But precisely because we don’t subscribe to the full-text, no ViewIt tab appears, so we don’t get the Unpaywall option!

I think there’d be a number of different ways to tweak the functionality that has been created to make it work for our usecase. I would really like the opportunity to have some dialogue with how it gets developed from here so we can make sure it works the best way possible.

My libraries circulate various pieces of equipment from microphones, to musical instruments, to 3D printers, to lockers, and the current physical material type table does not suffice without adding a slew of item policies or location codes, which is messy and makes the resulting analytics more painful than it should be.

Ex Libris support states that "The [physical material type] codes cannot be changed, because Development needs them for statistics across libraries." However individual libraries will have items that they need to distinguish between either for fulfillment rule purposes or our own statistics.

I would like there to be about 15 generic material types added to this table that will allow libraries a bit of flexibility in dealing with this category. Similar to how Primo has blank PNX fields that can be used to create additional facets, etc. that best fit the needs of the library and its users.

Currently, there are limited scheduling options for emailing Scheduled Reports (Alma Analytics Object area). Many of our users need reports delivered on the 1st of each month in order to capture the previous month's data. The only option right now somewhat close to that is delivery on the 2nd of each month. This doesn't work for us because it adds the first day's worth of data from the next month to the previous month. I propose adding delivery options for the 1st of each month. Better yet - how about offering a drop-down list where users can choose a certain day of the month for report delivery?

When using the Restore change type under Change item information, the only change made is toggling the "item is in temporary location" back to NO. Any values filled in for temporary library, temporary location, temporary item policy, temporary call number, etc. remain. Restore should clear those fields, or allow operators to keep those fields by unchecking a box that would be checked by default.

If the item has been scanned to have an item policy for special circ rules, that information remains in the record when it is restored, even though that information is not applied. If the item is given another temporary change that doesn't require a special item policy the previous item policy will be applied when it is moved to a temporary location. See attached file for an example, and desired option to clear all temporary info.

This was also suggested in 2017 NERS as Idea 5111: Remove Temporary Item Information during "Restore" Currently, temporary item information is not wiped out when a temporarily moved item is "restored" either via a staff process or expiration of the temporary move date. The info is confusing and can cause issues with Analytics, Manage Sets, and future temporary moves on the item.

See also the idea relating to removing temporary item information: https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173-alma/suggestions/11012787-remove-temporary-location-not-just-change-indicat

Currently the only way to use records from NZ in an IZ is to search them in the NZ and perform an action like "order" or "link" on every single record one by one. There are, however, situations where an IZ wants to use a bulk of records. For this purpose we need a possibility to link records in bulk and create inventory for the linked records.

We imagine a linking job that takes as an input a logical or itemized set of records saved from a search in the NZ. The linking job can create physical and electronic (and digital) inventory, similar to current import profiles. The inventory operations for electronic inventory should include an option to specify the desired action if the record and a portfolio exist already in the IZ, out of the following choices:

• Add new portfolio.


• Update portfolio information (the URL).


• Don't do anything.

Use case:
The NZ loads monthly updates from e-book vendors where the IZs have purchased different packages. The workflows for group inventory aren't applicable here because the NZ doesn't possess the necessary information for determining who has rights to which portfolio. OAI is no option because this currently creates duplicate portfolios each time a record gets updated in the NZ. The workarounds currently in place involve sending files back and forth which is error prone and not very efficient.

I suggest that if the "not needed by " date is reached then the patron request is cancelled.

The only function of “date not needed by” for patron physical item requests is to prevent items from being put into transit from other locations if the transit cannot be completed by the required date.

However this is not clear to patrons and users ask us why we send Hold available notices when they already indicated a date when they would no longer need the item.

Staff also waste time locating items that Patrons have indicated are no longer needed, only to waste more time when they take the unused item off the Hold shelf when it eventually expires.