I'm in agreement with the below comments. Reporting for ACRL is difficult without this field.

It would be great to get an update on this idea; our ACRL reports require us to include OA journal article requests. Since both books and journals can have OA requests, we need the data_type to distinguish whether OA books or journals are being used.

Totally agree! Anything to help make analysis easier, more efficient, and more meaningful/useful, makes sense.

I have a same thought as you. It will more effectively to analysis the usage data if add data type, access type or other section types. Without them, it is hard to classify and analytics the data. I look forward to hearing a good new of adding this element in the coming future.

Agreed. The "Data Type" feature is a vital component in generating useful data for the Counter-5 report. As ExLibis allows users to customize report according to their specific needs, this flexibility ensures the generated data aligns with their desired goals.

Agree. The data type is a kinda basic option for retrieving usages. Now the Counter 5 reports from Alma do not satisfy the needs of libraries in terms of usage collection.

Definitely agreed! The Data Type is a crucial element for filtering different material types, without the Data Type, lots of analysis cannot not be done. Much appreciated to have this element in Analytics soonest.

To amplify some points from below:

In COUNTER 5.1, data type is a required field. It is extremely important.
Without it, the Title Master Report is useless.
With 5.1, the Master Reports are now just the "reports". The "standard views" are just that, particular views of the reports. ALL Alma functionality, both SUSHI harvesting and Analytics fields should be focused on the reports, not the views. The "views" should be provided by Alma Analytics according to each institution's needs. This idea is a good starting point to get us there eventually.

Pauline, I'm so glad you added your comment because I was searching for this "idea" to comment the same thing. We finally have functional, effective COUNTER 5 Alma Analytics reports... and now I'm worried how the 5.1 release will impact how useful they will be if "Data_Type" is not added.
And considering how long this idea has been sitting here in the Idea Exchange, I REALLY hope this gets addressed sooner rather than later.

COUNTER R5 is going to be COUNTER R5.1. The R5.1 manual said, "The list of Data_Types has been expanded. This means that conference proceedings, for example, can be more accurately classified" (Section 13.3.1). The data_ types in R5 previously has newspaper/newsletter among other publication types. Now they will expand to include conference proceedings. The manual continues to ask consumers "... to use the Title Report to gain a full understanding of usage, rather than using Standard Views of the Title Report which are restricted to reporting on books and journals." But we can't use the TR title master report in Alma analytics because they do not have Data_Types dimension, making the report useless.

The TR title master report is getting more important as the data_types are being expanded. This is imperative for Ex Libris to accelerate their work on getting the Data_types dimension into Alma analytics for TR title master reports.

I was again wondering about this item, now that the Enhancements list is out for the year. I'm disappointed that this isn't an option for community voting. Can you explain how what it would take to get this item from "under review" to the actual potential enhancements? Expanding this indexing improves the stability of SUSHI reporting, since a single TM report can compensate for harvesting errors in multiple other reports.

Has there been any updates or work-arounds on this topic? I'm setting up SUSHI for the first time and certain item counts just don't seem to work in the sub reports. This is very basic if you want to be able to use the master reports for ACRL or cost per use

Can we get an update on this? It's been under review for over a year. This seems like it should be pretty basic functionality to add and would be extremely helpful. My library's director always wants to know what percentage of our use is articles vs. everything else, and it's impossible to give an easy, accurate answer without being able to include data type in analytics reports. Not all vendors with journal offerings have a TRJ1 report available for 2019, and it would make life a lot easier if we could just load the title master report for vendors instead of having to load multiple reports for the different content formats offered.

Now that Newspapers and OA journal titles have been removed from the JR1 report in COUNTER 5, having the ability to filter the Title Report to collect newspaper usage, etc. for the ACRL annual survey would be extremely helpful rather than having to manually run the reports on each vendor's admin. site.

Yoel, the idea is referring to the Data_Type and Section_Type attributes as specified in the COUNTER R5 standard:
https://www.projectcounter.org/code-of-practice-five-sections/3-0-technical-specifications/#commonattributes

Data_Type allows you to take the usage data included in a TR master report, and break it down by the kind of resource represented (e.g. Book, Journal, Report, Thesis_or_Dissertation, Newspaper_or_Newsletter, Other).

Section_Type similarly allows you to break down usage reported by chapters, articles, full books, or other kinds of sections.

Hello. Thank you for your idea. Please explain why it is not sufficient in this case to use the field "Material Type Indicator" in folder "Usage Data Details - Release 5" in the "Usage Data" subject area. You can filter it by "begins with TR-" to get the title reports.
See attached pictures.