In Advanced Search, allow filtering OUT specific locations. For example, allow use of the filer: Physical Location "IS NOT" X.
Many searches do not allow for an "IS NOT" operator, and in some cases it is greatly missed. For example, when trying to assemble large sets of records where you want to exclude just a few locations, or filter out a single library. Please allow for an "IS NOT" operator when doing an advanced search and filtering by location or library. I'm sure there are other search filters also missing the "IS NOT" operator. Please feel free to add more suggestions via a comment! :)
Alma team is analyzing to which indexes it is possible to add the “is not” and other negative comparators. In addition, there is a new feature coming called refined search which allows using indication rules created by the users (see Ability to search via free text MARC tag and subfields idea, NERS 2020).
Ex Libris is working on adding the "is not" operator whenever is possible. There are two different major use cases:
1. Condition in the same level as the entity being requested. For example All items not in a specific library.
2. Condition in a lower level (child) than the entity being requested. For example titles without items in Library A.
The first use case can be addressed and if there are gaps we will close them. The second use case is the problematic one. There are two sub-use cases for the second case Condition in a lower level:
2a. Entity partially meets the condition. For example, titles that part of their items are not in library A.
2b. Entity fully meets the condition. For example, titles that *all* of their items are not in library A.
The 2b sub-use cases require a totally different search infra and are not trivial.
The question is if sub-use case 2a is relevant or not. If 2a is not relevant then we can block the option to use "is not" operator for the level below. If it is relevant then the user should be aware that it will provide an answer to sub-use case 2a.
Esther Ernst commented
We have just changed from Aleph to Alma and are also very much missing the "IS NOT" operator, e.g. in the search indexes of the CZ "Authorities". Especially for cleaning up-work in Authorities it is absolutely necessary to be able to exclude criteria. The Boolean Operator "NOT" is basics for librarian work and we just don't understand why it should be missing.
We would be very grateful if the operator "NOT" could be allowed just as "AND" and "OR".
Sean Purcell commented
When doing an "electronic titles" search there is no "IS NOT" operator for "electronic collection name". Please add the IS NOT operator here. Interestingly, when doing an advanced search of "electronic collections", you CAN say electronic collection name "IS NOT" X.