The first indicator for the 776 field specifies whether that field should be displayed or not. I added some 776 fields with a first indicator 1 (do not display note) yet this field is displaying in Primo. I would suggest that when 776 is used with a first indicator 1, this field does not display in Primo as per MARC (see link below)

https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd776.html

HeinOnline articles currently not discoverable in Primo.

Salesforce case #00583901 refers (unpublished)

Ex Libris advises that, due to performance considerations, Primo search is unable to support the search expansion for the spelling variants that include the use of 's' or 'z' within a word. This is a common trans-Atlantic spelling variation, and omitting it has a significant impact on search results.

Example: a search for the terms “practice globalisation” produces 441,248 results, but by changing the 's' in globalisation to a 'z', Primo produces an additional 12,000 search results.

If all holdings across the Network Zone (NZ) are unavailable, we want to be able to suppress the option to place a Consortial loan request (ie. a resource sharing request in an automated fulfillment network), thus directing the user to ILL.

We would like SRU availability fields to include barcode. Barcode is a useful identifier for items. This addition would allow us to do things like get all the barcodes in a location and do an inventory.

Please provide advanced search functionality for the Newspaper Search. Users would like to limit searches by criteria such as publication name.

We would like to see Knowledge Unlatched fully indexed in the PCI to enhance discovery for all of the materials in this Open Access collection.

In dedup process, all fields from Additional Data section are merged and duplicate fields are removed. This design choice cause some issues with Citation service. When you merge records from differents sources, there is a strong possibility that data are not exactly the same and some data are duplicated. This problem may often be solved by choosing fields from prefered records as it is the case for display section

In the job details reports, where indexing and hotswapping are reported, there is no date/time stamp to indicate how long these portions of the job took to run. It's useful for guesstimating the length of a process before we start it and other sections like FRBR and DeDup include this information

According to documentation (https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Primo/ProductDocumentation/Primo/NewPrimoUserInterface/010FrequentlyAskedQuestions#Browser_Certification), Ex Libris does not support Microsoft Edge for Alma.
The use of Edge is growing and should be considered a major browser, and therefore supported.

This affects Primo/PrimoVE; but the job is in Alma.

The new feature (as of Nov 2019) to browse a list of journals by category depends on the 050$a. This should be expanded to use the 055$a, 060$a, 070$a, 080$a, 082$a, 083$a, 084$a, 085$a, and 086$a. Additionally, libraries should be able to pick which of the subfields to use.

This is an example of the lack of support for non-LC libraries.

This idea cross-posted as Alma idea.

More appropriate link resolving for "Ahead of Print" (pre-publish) articles.

We recently had a report of problem linking for an "Ahead of Print" Primo article result. In this instance, linking resolved to an incorrect article - since it matched by keyword search at the journal.

If better metadata cannot be obtained for "Ahead of print" articles, and these are not formally published articles, perhaps these results should not be included for Primo results -- or be able to be pulled into results in a separate facet?

Its tedious to check the quality of primo central collection. It will be helpful to have an API access to the raw data of Primo Central Collections. Collections need to be checked for quality issues e.g. resource types contained. Its important to understand the density, language, and formatting of metadata before a collection is activated in production. Please enable an API for the PNX / Metadata of the collections records. Metadata experts could then assess the quality of a collection more easily. The method would be also more reliable and convenient than checking (some) examples via the Primo frontend.

In Primo, allow the option to display to show print and electronic results side-by-side instead of one after the other. Also apply to link resolver results.
(Currently using Alma and Primo, not Primo VE.)

Could you work with Centre for Economic Policy Research to add metadata for their publications to Primo Central Index? This is a critical source for working papers for economists. Access to their content requires a subscription. Currently, there is an Alma CZ collection with a very small subset of the CEPR's publications.I have not been able to find a collection in Primo Central Index to turn on for this publisher.

https://cepr.org/publications