40 results found

1. Authority control for name-title access points: link bibliographic 1XX+240 to authority 1XX $t

   In Alma, bibliographic records containing 1XX + 240 do not establish an effective authority link with the corresponding name-title authority record (1XX $t).

   As a result, when the authorized access point for a name-title authority is updated (for example, a change in the title portion in 1XX $t), the update is not propagated to the linked bibliographic records. The 240 fields in affected bibliographic records remain unchanged and must be identified and edited manually.

   This behavior results in:

   · High manual maintenance effort

   · Increased risk of inconsistencies between authority and bibliographic data

   · Reduced effectiveness of authority control in Alma

   Use Case A library maintains name-title authority records for works and expressions. When corrections are made, the cataloger updates the authorized access point in the authority record (field 1XX $t).

   However, Alma does not automatically update the corresponding 240 fields in bibliographic records linked to that authority. The cataloger must therefore:

   1. Manually search for all bibliographic records containing the affected name-title access point

   2. Edit each 240 field individually to reflect the updated authorized form

   In large catalogs, this process is time-consuming, error-prone, and difficult to control, especially when multiple bibliographic records are involved.

   Expected Behavior Alma should support full authority control for name-title access points, including:

   · Proper linking between bibliographic 1XX + 240 fields and the corresponding name-title authority record (1XX $t)

   · Automatic propagation of authorized heading changes from authority records to all linked bibliographic records

   Implementing this functionality would bring name-title authorities in line with other controlled headings in Alma and significantly improve cataloging efficiency and data consistency.

   Example

   Bib record 100 1#$aCervantes Saavedra, Miguel de, $d1547-1616. 240 10$aDon Quixot de la Mancha. $lCatalà 245 0 |a Historia del enginyós cavaller Don Quixot de la Manxa

   Auth record 100 1_ |a Cervantes Saavedra, Miguel de, |d 1547-1616. |t Don Quijote de la Mancha. |l Català

   If we modify the $t of this authority, for example by entering “Quijotte,” the Authorities job will search for and make changes only in the $t of the 700 fields, so the 240 of this bibliographic record will not be modified.

   In Alma, bibliographic records containing 1XX + 240 do not establish an effective authority link with the corresponding name-title authority record (1XX $t).

   As a result, when the authorized access point for a name-title authority is updated (for example, a change in the title portion in 1XX $t), the update is not propagated to the linked bibliographic records. The 240 fields in affected bibliographic records remain unchanged and must be identified and edited manually.

   This behavior results in:

   · High manual maintenance effort

   · Increased risk of inconsistencies between authority and bibliographic data

   · Reduced effectiveness of authority control in… more

   2 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

2. Create new reports for Authority management

   National libraries and institutions managing controlled vocabularies require robust tools to ensure the integrity of their authority files. Current Alma functionality (Authority Control Task List) focuses primarily on the link between bibliographic and authority records. We propose a new set of dedicated Authority Management Reports to identify internal inconsistencies, errors, and redundancies within the authority files themselves.

   Proposed Reports & Functionality

   · Orphan Authority Records: Identifies authority records without any associated bibliographic records. Crucial for cleaning up legacy data or unused headings.

   · MARC Encoding Errors: Detects structural errors within authority records (e.g., missing mandatory fields like 008, invalid indicators, or incorrect subfield usage).

   · Duplicate Authority Records: Identifies records with identical authorized headings (1XX) to facilitate merging and maintain the "unique entry" principle.

   · Close Matches / Fuzzy Logic: A report showing records with high similarity in the 1XX field (e.g., minor punctuation or spelling differences) to catch potential duplicates.

   Justification for Development

   · Data Quality: For National Bibliographic Agencies, the authority file is a product in itself. These reports are essential to ensure the data shared with other libraries is accurate.

   · Workflow Efficiency: Currently, staff must create complex Analytics reports or use external tools to find these errors. Integrating this into the Authority Control Task List would streamline daily maintenance.

   · Database Health: Removing orphans and merging duplicates reduces system noise and improves search precision for both catalogers and end-users.

   National libraries and institutions managing controlled vocabularies require robust tools to ensure the integrity of their authority files. Current Alma functionality (Authority Control Task List) focuses primarily on the link between bibliographic and authority records. We propose a new set of dedicated Authority Management Reports to identify internal inconsistencies, errors, and redundancies within the authority files themselves.

   Proposed Reports & Functionality

   · Orphan Authority Records: Identifies authority records without any associated bibliographic records. Crucial for cleaning up legacy data or unused headings.

   · MARC Encoding Errors: Detects structural errors within authority records (e.g., missing mandatory fields like 008, invalid indicators,… more

   2 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

3. Update All Relevant Indicators When Correcting Preferred Terms Linked via Cross-References

   The recent enhancement to Preferred Term Correction correctly updates bibliographic headings when the preferred and non-preferred terms are in different authority fields (for example, 410 → 130), and changes the bibliographic field tag accordingly (e.g., 610 → 630).
   However, the current implementation does not fully synchronize MARC indicators between authority and bibliographic records.

   The enhancement documentation states:
   "When a bibliographic field is updated to an X30 field, the non-filing indicators in the bibliographic record will be adjusted based on the linked authority record. According to MARC21 standards, the 1st indicator of authority field 130 (Nonfiling characters) will be copied to the 2nd indicator of the X30 bibliographic field."
   This is not accurate. In MARC21 authority format, the 1st indicator of field 130 is undefined (#), and the 2nd indicator represents the number of nonfiling characters.
   Specifically:

   1. In cases involving authority field 130:
      o MARC21 defines the 2nd indicator of authority field 130 as the number of nonfiling characters.
      o In bibliographic X30 fields (130/630/730/830), the number of nonfiling characters is recorded in the 1st indicator.
      o Therefore, the system should correctly transfer the nonfiling value from the 2nd indicator of authority field 130 to the 1st indicator of the corresponding bibliographic X30 field.
      o In addition, the 2nd indicator of the bibliographic X30 field should not be modified as part of this process.

   2. In all other controlled access points (1XX, 6XX, 7XX, 8XX):
      o Whenever a bibliographic heading is linked to an authority record, the 1st indicator of the bibliographic field should be automatically synchronized with the 1st indicator of the corresponding authority 1XX field.
      o If indicators differ, they should be updated to ensure full consistency.
      Without this synchronization, inconsistencies remain between authority data and bibliographic headings, generating additional manual maintenance and undermining the integrity of authority control.

   Proposed Enhancement

   Extend Preferred Term Correction to include automatic indicator alignment between authority records and all linked controlled bibliographic access points, in full compliance with MARC21 specifications.

   The recent enhancement to Preferred Term Correction correctly updates bibliographic headings when the preferred and non-preferred terms are in different authority fields (for example, 410 → 130), and changes the bibliographic field tag accordingly (e.g., 610 → 630).
   However, the current implementation does not fully synchronize MARC indicators between authority and bibliographic records.

   The enhancement documentation states:
   "When a bibliographic field is updated to an X30 field, the non-filing indicators in the bibliographic record will be adjusted based on the linked authority record. According to MARC21 standards, the 1st indicator of authority field 130 (Nonfiling characters) will be copied to… more

   2 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

4. Relationship designators should not be searched in Field 5XX, subfield $a

   In Authorities, when relationship designators are used to specify relationships between agents in field 5XX, with subfield $i (relationship information), Alma searchs the relationship designators included in $i instead of searching the agent name included in subfield $a (personal names; corporate names, etc.). The subfield $i is not part of the name of the author or contributor, it is a separate element that denotes a relationship between agents. It is for this reason that we propose that names be indexed by the name included in subfield $a instead of subfield $i.

   2 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

5. Community Zone Authorities vs Network Zone Authorities

   When authority records are managed from a Network Zone (NZ) in a cooperative way—that is, when several institutions create and maintain authority records of different types (names, subjects, etc.)—it is confusing for catalogers when authorities from the Community Zone appear.

   For this reason, we would like the possibility to choose from which zone we view authority records, mainly in these two screens:

   • In Browse Authority Headings in the NZ, we would like to have different tabs to choose which zone we want to consult, the NZ or the CZ
   • In Browse Authority Headings in any IZ of the Network, we currently have two tabs: Community and Institution; and, Commmunity and Network. We would like to have a new tab to consult authority records only from the NZ.

   When authority records are managed from a Network Zone (NZ) in a cooperative way—that is, when several institutions create and maintain authority records of different types (names, subjects, etc.)—it is confusing for catalogers when authorities from the Community Zone appear.

   For this reason, we would like the possibility to choose from which zone we view authority records, mainly in these two screens:

   • In Browse Authority Headings in the NZ, we would like to have different tabs to choose which zone we want to consult, the NZ or the CZ
   • In Browse Authority Headings in any IZ of the… more

   •  

   •  

   2 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

6. Add “Report to Ex Libris” Option to Failed Scheduled Alma Jobs

   Scheduled Alma jobs that end with errors do not currently provide a built-in “Report to Ex Libris” option. Reporting such issues requires opening a support case manually and copying information from the job report.
   Idea: Extend the existing “Report to Ex Libris” functionality (available at the portfolio level) to scheduled Alma job reports.
   For scheduled jobs that end with Error or Failed status, allow users to open a reporting screen, pre-filled with the relevant job details (Job ID, process ID, error message).
   Benefit: Provides a consistent reporting experience for recurring system jobs and improves accuracy of job-related support cases.

   4 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

7. Add "created by user" and "modified by user" Index in the Alma search

   Now that the new relative date search exists in Alma, it would be very helpful to have another index "created by user" and "modified by user" to be able to search for records created or modified by a specific user within a relative date range.
   For exemple, a user could be able to review all the records she/he createred the day before in a easy way.

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Edit…  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

8. Improve batch Connexion export process

   Currently, exporting records in batch from Connexion results in a status report for each individual record as it processes. Each status window must be closed before the next record can be processed. See screenshot for example. This becomes very tedious when working with hundreds of records. A configuration that permits Connexion to export in true batch form with a status report appearing after either the complete job or a set number of records (10 or more) would be preferable.

   •  

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Edit…  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

9. 【NACSIS-CAT/ILL Cloud App】We would like to request that prefix matching search, similar to WebUIP, be implemented in the Cloud App as well.

   Unlike Western books, Japanese titles are not displayed word by word, so prefix matching search is frequently used.
   Therefore, it would be very helpful if prefix matching search could be enabled, as it is in WebUIP.

   The following three prefix matches are possible in WebUIP but not in the Cloud App. Could you please adjust the system to enable prefix matching search?
   (1) Cloud App “NACSIS-CAT/ILL” > Catalog > Book Bibliography
   (2) Cloud App “NACSIS-CAT/ILL” > Catalog > Journal Bibliography
   (3) Cloud App “NACSIS-CAT/ILL” > Catalog > Uniform Title Authority

   Thank you in advance.

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Edit…  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

10. Please add the feature „Chat between Institution Zones“ to the Metadata Editor

    Ex Libris should offer the option of creating a chat for each data record. This feature would facilitate communication between individual libraries regarding incorrect data records.
    Currently, communication concerning bibliographic records are sent by email via a mailing list. For a library that has many departments with numerous employees, it is difficult to develop a workflow for jointly processing these emails. In a chat, several people within an institution can communicate with each other without having to coordinate internally beforehand.
    But smaller libraries would also benefit from this chat function. When several emails are sent back and forth on a topic, it quickly becomes confusing.
    It is also more efficient and clearer if the communication about a data record can be found next to the data record itself.
    One way to integrate a chat function into individual records would be to add a “Chat between Institution Zones“ button to each record in the search view and/or in the Metadata Editor (see image Alma Chat 1.1 and Alma Chat 1.2).
    An editor should then open (a big window unlike the small window provided by the „Add Note“ option“), in which the written exchange between the libraries concerned can take place. One library sends a request to the other libraries, and the other libraries respond to it. The last library to respond, or the library that makes the final adjustments to the record, should change the status of the chat from “open” to “closed” This requires a drop-down menu within the chat editor (see image Alma Chat 2 + 3).
    All chats with the status „open“ in every Institution Zone should be searchable using the advanced search (see image Alma Chat 4). Chats with the status „closed“ could still be searched using the title or ID of the record via the simple search.

    Ex Libris should offer the option of creating a chat for each data record. This feature would facilitate communication between individual libraries regarding incorrect data records.
    Currently, communication concerning bibliographic records are sent by email via a mailing list. For a library that has many departments with numerous employees, it is difficult to develop a workflow for jointly processing these emails. In a chat, several people within an institution can communicate with each other without having to coordinate internally beforehand.
    But smaller libraries would also benefit from this chat function. When several emails are sent back and forth on a… more

    •  

    •  

    269 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    19 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating
    AdminErez Shabo (Senior Product Owner, Ex Libris) responded

    Could you please clarify whether this request refers to communication between consortia (Network Zone) members regarding their shared data?

11. Multiple Logical Sets Attached to Logical Collections in Collection Discovery

    I would like to be able to create a Logical Collection in Collection Discovery that combines the results of at least two different logical sets.

    CASE EXAMPLE: I have been asked to create "New Book" collections for multiple departments that include both print books and ebooks. For the print books, the fields I need to query on are only available the creation of a Physical Titles search set. For the ebooks, the fields I need to query on are only in an Electronic Titles search set. Since I cannot merge the results into a single logical set, that means I need to create two different "New Book" collections for each department.

    I would like to be able to create a Logical Collection in Collection Discovery that combines the results of at least two different logical sets.

    CASE EXAMPLE: I have been asked to create "New Book" collections for multiple departments that include both print books and ebooks. For the print books, the fields I need to query on are only available the creation of a Physical Titles search set. For the ebooks, the fields I need to query on are only in an Electronic Titles search set. Since I cannot merge the results into a single logical set, that means I… more

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Edit…  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

12. Make Existing Record Primary When Merging via Search Resources

    When merging records through Alma’s Search Resources, make the existing Alma record the Primary and the incoming external record the Secondary.

    Currently, when bringing in external records, Import and Integration Profiles treat the existing Alma record as Primary, but Search Resources makes the external record Primary. This inconsistency forces libraries to maintain two opposing sets of merge rules, depending on how the record enters Alma.

    Making the Alma record Primary in Search Resources would align the behavior with other workflows. This could be configurable or at least opt-in so libraries can adjust their merge rule settings in the External Search Resources configuration to coincide with the change.

    Benefits:
    Simplifies workflows by allowing a single set of merge rules.
    Reduces user confusion, since rule descriptions will match consistently across scenarios.
    Provides consistency in the Metadata Editor, where the record on the left will always be the Primary.

    When merging records through Alma’s Search Resources, make the existing Alma record the Primary and the incoming external record the Secondary.

    Currently, when bringing in external records, Import and Integration Profiles treat the existing Alma record as Primary, but Search Resources makes the external record Primary. This inconsistency forces libraries to maintain two opposing sets of merge rules, depending on how the record enters Alma.

    Making the Alma record Primary in Search Resources would align the behavior with other workflows. This could be configurable or at least opt-in so libraries can adjust their merge rule settings in the External Search… more

    8 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

13. Display of Collections in Collections Lobby in Primo VE

    Ability to only display digital collections in the Collections Lobby page of the Primo View, whose profile slot includes the collection’s local scope.
    Case number 08113340

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Edit…  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

14. versions in new interface

    In the new interface it is no longer possible to see dates of changes other than the original creation date and who created the record plus the last edited date and who made that change. Please reinstate the ability to see more version change dates without editing the record so that users who do not have the Cataloguer role can see this information in view-only mode.

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Edit…  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

15. Add the ability to enter a string of delimited values in bulk to Alma Advanced Search fields

    Currently adding fields and values to Alma Advanced Search is only possible one by one. This is a painfully slow and click-heavy activity when there are many parameters to be added. This also risks slowing down Alma UI when upwards of several hundred fields (as advised by Ex Libris Support).
    It is proposed to support many values to be copy and pasted in to a single field by a string with separator, such as an OR Boolean or semi-colon representing the OR.

    Use case: We use a logical set to fuel our Collection Discovery collection titled “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander authors”. We’re now in the process of shifting this from a curated collection by manual addition of a bibliographic local field to a single work for the author to a comprehensive collection for all works we hold by the Authority IDs for the identified authors. We have already contributed more than 70 new LCNAMES Authorities via NACO membership as part of this work supporting recognition of First Nations peoples and for our faculty to indigenise their curriculum by ease of ability to find our related holdings in Primo by Collection facet and collection. However, Alma makes this process difficult in our logical set in having to one by one add the Authority IDs. Ex Libris confirmed there is no current functionality to meet this need.

    Example string for Authority ID contains phrase no2025050743 OR no2025048340 OR no2025018153 OR no2025013888 OR no00089878 OR no2025019805 OR no2025026097 OR no2025018142 OR no2025018141 OR no2025061608 OR no2025019804 OR no2025020415 OR no2025030597 OR n93058348 OR no2025034631 OR no2025022265

    See screenshot attached for the current situation and improvement option suggestions.

    Currently adding fields and values to Alma Advanced Search is only possible one by one. This is a painfully slow and click-heavy activity when there are many parameters to be added. This also risks slowing down Alma UI when upwards of several hundred fields (as advised by Ex Libris Support).
    It is proposed to support many values to be copy and pasted in to a single field by a string with separator, such as an OR Boolean or semi-colon representing the OR.

    Use case: We use a logical set to fuel our Collection Discovery collection titled “Aboriginal and Torres Strait… more

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

16. Enable local extensions on MARC 79X and 89X

    OCLC Bibliographic Formats and Standards sets out tags 79X (790-799) and 89X (896-899) as valid for local uses. These ranges should be available for network zone members to use as well. Adopting these ranges will allow catalogers to directly adapt records from WorldCat into a network and add local extensions without having to remap from the OCLC-supported field to a field in Alma, such as a 9XX.

    Catalogers primarily use these fields to enter details such as authors with local affiliations (e.g., current faculty members), dissertation advisors or members of dissertation committees, and the college within the institution supervising the dissertation. These are locally-relevant data that are not always relevant in the universal, shared record. Allowing their inclusion enables a network member to highlight what makes the record and information valuable to the institution.

    Moreover, the use of a local extension for this data helps protect the data from removal by other network members, and the data are protected if the network record is overlaid by a WorldCat record that doesn't retain that data.

    OCLC Bibliographic Formats and Standards sets out tags 79X (790-799) and 89X (896-899) as valid for local uses. These ranges should be available for network zone members to use as well. Adopting these ranges will allow catalogers to directly adapt records from WorldCat into a network and add local extensions without having to remap from the OCLC-supported field to a field in Alma, such as a 9XX.

    Catalogers primarily use these fields to enter details such as authors with local affiliations (e.g., current faculty members), dissertation advisors or members of dissertation committees, and the college within the institution supervising the… more

    8 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

17. MD editor save marc tags chronologically

    Upon save any MARC tags that are in the wrong chronological order are saved in the correct order.

    13 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

18. Add Option to Handle Multi-Matches Automatically Based on Brief Level

    Alma’s import profile functionality currently includes the option "Do not override/merge a record with lower brief version", which ensures that an incoming record is not loaded if its brief level is lower than that of the matched record in Alma.

    We would like to see this functionality extended to enable handling multi-matches automatically. Currently, when an incoming record matches multiple existing records in Alma, the import process still flags this as an multi-match issue, even if all matched records in Alma have a higher brief level than the incoming record. These cases must then be reviewed and resolved manually by staff, despite the fact that the incoming record can be rejected automatically based on its brief level.

    To support this, a checkbox like "Discard lower brief level record automatically" could be added to the "Automatic Multi-Match Handling" section under the "Match Profile" tab in an import profile. This would reduce the number of manual staff interventions and increase efficiency in working with Alma for metadata specialists.

    Alma’s import profile functionality currently includes the option "Do not override/merge a record with lower brief version", which ensures that an incoming record is not loaded if its brief level is lower than that of the matched record in Alma.

    We would like to see this functionality extended to enable handling multi-matches automatically. Currently, when an incoming record matches multiple existing records in Alma, the import process still flags this as an multi-match issue, even if all matched records in Alma have a higher brief level than the incoming record. These cases must then be reviewed and resolved manually by… more

    10 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

19. Change the order of the dropdown menu for 'Run a Job'

    It would save a lot of time and extra clicks if the first option in the dropdown menu for 'Run a job' was switched to 'Name', rather than 'Description'.

    7 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

20. Manage Sets without Repository Manager permissions

    It would be nice if we could update and manage repository sets without needing the Repository Manager role. Without it, staff can create sets and run queries, but they can't update any sets that weren't personally created by them, making it so that managers are having to make small updates that could easily be made by staff.

    7 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Resource Management - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating