Provide ability to turn off the Related Record functionality for physical items
Provide ability to turn off Related Record functionality for physical items. I would like to be able to decide for each related field in the MARC record - 773, 774, 777, 786, 800, 810, 811, and 830 whether or not Primo will display the related record information for physical items.
There are cases where displaying related record information to the user is more confusing then helpful. 830 series fields, for example, will display "related" records that may not relate at all to a users search, especially if the series is general like: "Brill's studies in intellectual history." I would like to have the ability to decide whether or not to display these relations in the user interface.
Martin Gränicher commented
Making display of related holdings dependent on bibliographical information seems inconsistent to me as it mixes the bibliographic with the inventory level.
In our catalog it would make sense to only display related records for bib records which do not have inventory attached.
Marcia Barrett commented
The linking functionality doesn't work as I believe it should. Clicking on the related title (776 electronic version) link populates a title proper search in Primo. Without the other titls information for this particular title ("Loaded: a disarming history of the Second Amendment"), numerous irrelevant results are retrieved.
I thought related titles linking should be done on a subfield w control number to avoid this sort of problem.
Petra Gratzl commented
We fully support this idea as after the go-live with Alma we experienced severe misunderstandings due to the display of related records in Primo (Salesforce Case #00497487). But we would like to once again underline the importance of indicators, especially regarding MARC field 773. Thus we would prefer not only to have the oppurtunity to turn off linking of the field as a whole but more granular to turn off linking in connection with a specific combination of indicators.
This idea is broader and covers more MARC tags than the other idea (which is only 830).
Friederike Kramer commented
We also discussed this in DACHELA and we would highly appreciate a functionality like this! We also need it for the display in Alma, not only for Primo.
A Rowe commented
Is this idea similar / the same as https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173-alma/suggestions/13699452-linking-bib-records-based-on-830-x-should-be-opti