Alma

← Have an idea for Ex Libris?

Your feedback matters to us. Help us improve Alma by telling us what you’d like to see using the message areas below. You can also can support something already posted.

We would love to be able to respond to every idea that is submitted, but this is not feasible. We are, however, committed to responding to the most popular ideas—those that have received the most points.

For more information please review our FAQ and guidelines. Thank you.

How can we improve Alma?

You've used all your votes and won't be able to post a new idea, but you can still search and comment on existing ideas.

There are two ways to get more votes:

When an admin closes an idea you've voted on, you'll get your votes back from that idea.
You can remove your votes from an open idea you support.
To see ideas you have already voted on, select the "My feedback" filter and select "My open ideas".

Enter your idea

(thinking…)

Enter your idea and we'll search to see if someone has already suggested it.

If a similar idea already exists, you can support and comment on it.

If it doesn't exist, you can post your idea so others can support it.

Enter your idea and we'll search to see if someone has already suggested it.

Job or tool for extraction of related bibliographic records
We would like the ability to get a hold of or extract the related bibliographic records in bulk based on a set of (other) bib-records.

Alma already now automatically displays related records in "other details". We understand that the links are built based on bibliographic data in the MARC linking fields: 773, 774, 777, 786, 800, 810, 811, and 830 (subfield w,x,z).

An example of a related record is a title within a monographic series. In this case, the bib record for the single monograph has a 830 $w with the MMS-ID/system number of the superordinate bib record.

We would like exactly this function but not only for one title but for a set of bib records.

Use cases are:

Moving a part of our library to a different location or even library. We make the selection for the move based on items with a certain call number or location, but have trouble getting a hold of holdings which might belong to related bib-records but don’t have a permanent call number or a specific location.

When migrating from Aleph to Alma, a lot of sub- and superordinate bib records were not anchored in our Institution Zone, because they didn’t have inventory. However, they’re related to bib-records on superordinate (series) or subordinate (journal articles) level, which do have inventory. Now we need to find those related records in order to anchor them into our IZ.

We imagine, the easiest way would be to create a job, which exports all related bib-records based on a set of bib-records. Also an analytics-column, which displays all related MMS-IDs would work. The export should include the type of link (MARC field 773, 800, etc.) and all the other subfields of those MARC fields, so that we can sort the export list accordingly.

Since cataloguing hierarchical bib records is widely practiced all over the world and especially so in the German speaking regions, and since they’re part of the RDA cataloguing regulations, we are convinced, that this could be useful for many libraries.
We would like the ability to get a hold of or extract the related bibliographic records in bulk based on a set of (other) bib-records.

Alma already now automatically displays related records in "other details". We understand that the links are built based on bibliographic data in the MARC linking fields: 773, 774, 777, 786, 800, 810, 811, and 830 (subfield w,x,z).

An example of a related record is a title within a monographic series. In this case, the bib record for the single monograph has a 830 $w with the MMS-ID/system number of the superordinate bib record.

We would…
144 votes

Vote

We're glad you're here
Please sign in to leave feedback

Signed in as (Sign out)

Close

Close

You have left! (?) (thinking…)

6 comments · Metadata Management · Delete… · Admin →

Planned · AdminErez Shabo (Product Manager, Ex Libris) responded

I would like to share an update on how this request is addressed using the recently introduced Alma custom bibliographic search indexes. This new infrastructure enables bulk identification and management of related bibliographic records by combining custom local search indexes with existing set based workflows.
Institutions can configure custom search indexes based on MARC linking fields, including 773 and 774. These indexes support subfield delimiters, allowing precise searching for identifiers stored in $w or $x, such as MMS IDs, system numbers, or other control numbers used to express relationships between records.
Using these custom indexes, staff can search across the bibliographic repository to identify related records and build logical sets based on the retrieved results. For example, identifiers from an initial set can be searched directly in the 773 or 774 custom indexes to retrieve bibliographic records that represent Part Of or Contains relationships.
The resulting records can then be saved as a logical set of related bibliographic records, supporting downstream Alma workflows such as export, review, anchoring into the Institution Zone, and collection management processes. The same approach can be extended by adding additional linking fields, such as 800, 810, 811, or 830, allowing institutions to expand the supported relationship types according to their specific cataloging and operational needs.
For more information on the Alma custom search indexes please refer to the Custom Bibliographic Search Indexes page.
I would like to share an update on how this request is addressed using the recently introduced Alma custom bibliographic search indexes. This new infrastructure enables bulk identification and management of related bibliographic records by combining custom local search indexes with existing set based workflows.
Institutions can configure custom search indexes based on MARC linking fields, including 773 and 774. These indexes support subfield delimiters, allowing precise searching for identifiers stored in $w or $x, such as MMS IDs, system numbers, or other control numbers used to express relationships between records.
Using these custom indexes, staff can search across the bibliographic repository to identify related records and build logical sets based on the retrieved results. For example, identifiers from an initial set can be searched directly in the 773 or 774 custom indexes to retrieve bibliographic records that represent Part Of or Contains relationships.
The resulting records can then be…
Display related holdings for monographs only for the 773 $w relation and not for the 8xx $w relation

When filtering to a certain location via facets, you often get results from other locations too, which is unexpected from patrons perspective in many cases. This is caused by the current related records setting which is also taking locations with related records into account. The display is correct for analytical records without inventory (book chapters and articles), but not for the other monographical resources.

What we wish to achieve is the following:

When the record of a book chapter, journal issue or journal article (i.e. a record containing a 773 field with $w) is viewed in Primo, the holding of the record linked via 773 $w is displayed.

When records contain a series link (8xx $w) or a related record (76x/77x/78x $w - exception: 773), we do wish to display a link to the related record (via system number), but not the related holding.

Right now, the configuration does not offer the needed flexibility.

When filtering to a certain location via facets, you often get results from other locations too, which is unexpected from patrons perspective in many cases. This is caused by the current related records setting which is also taking locations with related records into account. The display is correct for analytical records without inventory (book chapters and articles), but not for the other monographical resources.

What we wish to achieve is the following:

When the record of a book chapter, journal issue or journal article (i.e. a record containing a 773 field with $w) is viewed in Primo, the holding of…

665 votes

Vote

We're glad you're here
Please sign in to leave feedback

Signed in as (Sign out)

Close

Close

You have left! (?) (thinking…)

30 comments · Metadata Management · Delete… · Admin →

Planned · AdminErez Shabo (Product Manager, Ex Libris) responded

I want to share with you our plan for releasing this feature:
May 2026: Testing phase for selected customers in Sandbox environments. We can include up to five customers. Please let me know if you are interested.
August 2026: General release. Customers will be able to turn on a new UI option that defines how the Contains related record holdings are displayed in Primo and Alma.
Note: Full functionality will be available after the November to December 2026 semiannual reindexing.
If you are interested in participating in the early access, please feel free to contact me at Erez.Shabo@Clarivate.com.
Indication that shows I edited an open record

Icons in MD-Editor only show if a record has been saved or not. I would like to have an indication to see if the record has been edited by me after I opened it.

238 votes

Vote

We're glad you're here
Please sign in to leave feedback

Signed in as (Sign out)

Close

Close

You have left! (?) (thinking…)

7 comments · Metadata Management · Delete… · Admin →

Planned · AdminLiza Voloshin (Product Owner, Alma Resource Management, Ex Libris) responded

Hi all,

This idea was marked as Completed by mistake. However it is planned to be implemented later in the year.

Stay tuned,
Alma Product.
Allow renaming of normalization, indication, and merge rules

Please allow renaming of normalization, indication, and merge rules. Right now you can only duplicate the rule and change the name of the copied rule.

135 votes

Vote

We're glad you're here
Please sign in to leave feedback

Signed in as (Sign out)

Close

Close

You have left! (?) (thinking…)

Planned · 0 comments · Metadata Management · Delete… · Admin →
Add notifications to Alma reminders

I appreciate the addition of the Reminders in Alma, but I think it would be even more useful if reminders could trigger email notifications when the reminder date has arrived.

215 votes

Vote

We're glad you're here
Please sign in to leave feedback

Signed in as (Sign out)

Close

Close

You have left! (?) (thinking…)

Planned · 17 comments · Metadata Management · Delete… · Admin →
Prompt message if you have not saved a record before releasing

Currently if you edit a record and then go to release it before you have saved, you do not get any kind of prompt asking if you want to release it without saving.

There is also no prompt message if you try to save a record that has blocks to let you know that the action was not done.

102 votes

Vote

We're glad you're here
Please sign in to leave feedback

Signed in as (Sign out)

Close

Close

You have left! (?) (thinking…)

Planned · 3 comments · Metadata Management · Delete… · Admin →

Don't see your idea?

How can we improve Alma?

There are two ways to get more votes:

We're glad you're here

We're glad you're here

We're glad you're here

We're glad you're here

We're glad you're here

We're glad you're here

We're glad you're here

We're glad you're here

Alma

Categories