Skip to content

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".
(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.

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback

8 results found

  1. 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…

    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…)
    3 comments  ·  Metadata Management  ·  Admin →

  2. Include games and models as Resource Types

    In accordance with the MARC21 Format for Bibliographic Data, when LDR pos. 06 = r (for "three-dimensional artifact"), we're supposed to follow the "Visual materials" definition of 008, described at https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd008v.html.

    Currently, the Rules Used to Create the Resource Type Field (https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Product_Documentation/010Alma_Online_Help_(English)/010Getting_Started/050Alma_User_Interface_%E2%80%93_General_Information/Searching_in_Alma#Rules_Used_to_Create_the_Resource_Type_Field_MARC_21_KORMARC_and_UNIMARC) do not include games or models.

    These would be indicated in the bibliographic record as:
    LDR pos. 06 = r AND 008 pos. 33 = g (for "game")
    LDR pos. 06 = r AND 008 pos. 33 = q (for "model")

    Could these specifications be added to this Rules list? They are currently listed as…

    14 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  ·  6 comments  ·  Metadata Management  ·  Admin →

  3. 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…

    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…)
    27 comments  ·  Metadata Management  ·  Admin →
    Planned  ·  AdminErez Shabo (Senior Product Owner, Ex Libris) responded

    Hi all,

    I would like to share with you a high level solution we are planning for this highly voted idea, tentatively scheduled for May 2026.

    We are introducing new logic to determine when related holdings should appear in Primo GetIt for bibliographic relationships. This logic ensures that holdings are displayed only for valid monograph relations (such as those expressed through 773 2nd ind ≠ 8 / 774), while other relationship types, including 773 2nd ind = 8 or 8XX based series links, will display only a navigational link without exposing holdings. For those who choose to opt in, this update provides consistent and predictable behavior across indexing, relation creation, and faceted location filtering. The change will require rebuilding the bibliographic records' relations.

    Erez

  4. Make configurable pop-up assistance in metadata editor

    Currently the po-up assistance in metadata editor for subfields 260$a$b$e$f, 264$a$b, 505$r$t and 561$a is hardcoded and it can not be deactivated. Activation/Deactivation should be configurable. We have many queries from our catalogers about that.

    303 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…)
    16 comments  ·  Metadata Management  ·  Admin →

  5. 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  ·  Admin →

  6. 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  ·  Admin →

  7. Identify headings linked to authority records in Simple Record View

    I frequently consult the Simple Record View page of bibliographic records when working on the Authority Control Task List. This view, however, does not indicate which headings are linked to authority records and which are not. The only place in Alma to confirm this is through the Metadata Editor.

    This proposal recommends adding a marker (such as the binoculars icon found in the Metadata Editor) to those fields in the Simple Record View with headings linked to authority records. This would save a step in the Task List review process, not to mention being helpful to any Alma user looking…

    100 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  ·  2 comments  ·  Metadata Management  ·  Admin →

  8. 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  ·  Admin →
  • Don't see your idea?

Alma

Categories

Feedback and Knowledge Base

(thinking…)