We are disappointed with the technical support service provided by Ex Libris. We strongly believe that Ex Libris should provide customers with more effective, prompt and interactive service.

There should be an option to call or chat online in real time with a support person who has a sound understanding of the product in question. This would be in line with all system vendors we have previously dealt with.

We appreciate that there will be some issues that are designated as bugs or enhancements and will require more in depth investigation. However, a direct call/chat option with a properly trained support analyst would quickly and efficiently separate these issues from more general product queries. We are aware that there are many call-logging options used widely by other companies, such as FastCall, TenFold and RingDNA, which can be used to allow customer calls/chats to be registered directly in Salesforce. We believe that Ex Libris should implement this improvement as soon as possible.

Please vote to show your support for this idea and feel free to add comments relating to your experience of this issue.

Related to a previous idea now marked as Completed
(see: https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308176-primo/suggestions/35488570-utilize-ldr-and-marc-fixed-fields-006-007-008-in)

The functionality introduced in the April 2019 release only allows you to specify ONE field in the source MARC record that contains the resource type that you want to map to the local resource type.

Primo VE should to be able to determine the resource type from combinations of data in MORE THAN ONE of the fields in the MARC record; i.e. fixed-field coding in the 006/007/008 field in conjunction with the LDR field.

This is particularly crucial for complex resources not coded as language material (LDR pos. 06 = a) as changing LDR position 06 to m for computer file or p for mixed materials changes the definitions of positions 18-34 in the 008 field.

Data in the LDR/006/007/008 fields cannot be assessed in isolation, but must be combined together in order to accurately determine the resource-type.

It would be useful if item policy could be configured as a field to display in either the brief or full item display. Currently, the loanable indicator is defined by the fulfillment terms of use, which is dependent on users signing in in order for Primo to calculate the loan policy specifically for that user.

Having the option to display the item policy from Alma as a field in Primo would be beneficial as this does not change dependent on the user type or fulfillment rules. It would also provide more information to users irrespective of whether they are able to sign into Primo (e.g. users not affiliated to the institution will be unable to sign in) and makes it clearer and easier for staff to explain to customers why a particular item can/cannot be borrowed.

Primo VE is configured to map 6XX $v form subdivisions to a separate display field, breaking the subject string. In some cases, the form subdivision is plucked out of the 6XX, leaving the surrounding string incomplete. For example:

600 10 $aO'Keeffe, Georgia, $d1887-1986 $vExhibitions
displays in Primo VE as:

Subject O'Keeffe, Georgia, 1887-1986

Genre Exhibitions

651 #0 $aRome (Italy) $vMaps $vEarly works to 1800
displays in Primo VE as:

Subject Rome (Italy)

Genre Maps
Early works to 1800

And so on, for all 6XX $v form subdivisions. This cannot be reconfigured. Additionally, each occurrence of the form subdivision is displayed as a separate genre. An exhibition catalog with three artists appearing in 6XX fields would result in three genre term displays, all saying "Exhibitions".

To preserve our subject string with form subdivisions intact, we were advised to consider adding a 9XX with the field as we want it to display and labeling that as Subject in Primo VE.This adds steps to cataloger workflow and generates unnecessary data in the records.

This display feature should be reconsidered. Whether or not to split $v form subdivisions should at least be configurable by libraries.

Create Discovery Manager roles and give customers the possibility to assign Discovery roles to colleagues who are in charge of specific content updates in the front end (notably Tag management, Resource Recommender management, Primo Central Index activations/deactivations) and who are not necessarily Primo administrators. For more flexibility and granularity, different roles (or parameters to add?) should be created. For example, a staff user in charge of Resource Recommender management should not necessarily have access to PCI activations.

Subject and reference librarians could directly work in Alma in order to keep recommended resources, tags and PCI collections updated; tasks where traditional Primo administrator skills are not required. Currently, a single 'Discovery – Admin’ role concentrates too many responsibilities and functionalities.

Currently we have print books with digital representations attached in Alma, for use in Leganto. We suppress these representations from Primo by using a note and display logic as this is the only option currently available. However this means that the book in Primo shows an "available online" status in the brief results, and when the full record is opened there is a View Online (GetIT tab) section that is just blank. Returning to the brief results then shows "Check available services". This is very confusing to users. We would like to have a different method of suppressing that means the GetIt tab isn't invoked in Primo and/or the option to switch the GetIt tab off for certain records.

En los casos en que disponemos de un registro bibliográfico con ejemplares en formato impreso, copia electrónica activada en la "Comunity Zone", y además se ha activado también en Primo Central para garantizar la indexación y la capacidad de recuperación a nivel de texto completo, el registro bibliográfico se visualiza en Primo VE como si fueran dos registros bibliográficos exactamente con la misma información (códigos de barras, signaturas y ubicaciones duplicados).

Según nos dicen desde SalesForce, debido a limitaciones/arquitectura del sistema, no es posible combinar el registro de Primo Central con los registros locales en Alma, lo cual crea confusión entre nuestro personal y usuarios.

Adjunto una copia de pantalla para que lo véais.

In Primo VE, only one of “vocabulary” is available - “Library of Congress Subject Headings.” The choice to use this “vocabulary” is automatically made for you when you choose “Browse by Library of Congress Subject.” The index “Library of Congress name authority records for 651” is not available through this search as it is through the Metadata Editor via Alma. Thus, many, many LC subject headings cannot actually be browsed in Primo VE. Example, you can find NO headings beginning with “Colombia – Commerce,” because there is no LC subject authority for “Colombia – Commerce” or for any further subdivision of that heading. You CANNOT find the heading “Colombia – Commerce – History” by browse in Primo. Browse by subject gives incomplete results - nearly half the records are not discoverable using this method. Many researchers use this method to find their materials.