When there are records in CDI that have link in record, but also would return links from the link resolver both types of links should be displayed to the end user.

The challenges with the link in record are discussed in this idea: https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308176-primo/suggestions/40487230-preference-cdi-link-resolver-records-over-link-in

They have a tendency to break and if the link for some reason do not lead to the full text the end user does not get any other way to the full text (as they do with the multiple links fromt he link resolver).

We hope that Ex Libris enables the system to display both link in record links and link resolver links for the same item.

This should be done for both Primo and Primo VE. If this should be configurable can be discussed with the Primo Working group.

The configuration options for facets in Primo VE are currently very limited, and not at parity with Primo on Back Office. It is not currently possible in Primo VE for a single record to have multiple facets or prefilter resource type values, to better align with CDI in a blended search, it is not possible to configure the facet and prefilter resource type values separately and independently of the display resource type values, and these facets cannot be configured with sufficient granularity. As examples of this configuration issue to be made possible with this request: Example 1: Our display types are mostly based on physical format: print books, ebooks, microforms, audio CDs and so on. However, because we are able to apply multiple facet values to a record, those items above might also be able to facet as a dissertation or conference proceeding, etc. Our users are accustomed to being able to facet or limit by those multiple values. This difference in behavior can be seen in a search for "conference" in Primo Back Office (https://tinyurl.com/1ouvijhn) vs. our test instance of VE (https://tinyurl.com/16j67u7t). In the Primo Back Office version, more records are identified as conference proceedings because we use more strategies to identify them as such. Also, if one limits to conference proceedings, they can then further limit by format, such as print book or audio CD. For prefilter, we also incorporate multiple resource types together into a single category (e.g., audio or video). This enables us to help users who are only interested in a specific format, such as streaming video, as well as users who wish to search for audio or video more generally. Example 2: As an example, we treat the audio and video resource types differently for facets and prefilter within Primo Back Office. For facets, we identify the specific resource type: e-audio/streaming audio, audio CD, audio cassette or LP. However, for prefilter, we incorporate these resource types together into a single audio category. Example 3: Applying the Local Resource Type “Microform” would replace the primary original resource type “Book,” “Journal,” “Map,” etc. – but in fact both the physical format “Microform” and the original resource type “Book” or “Journal” or “Map” would be needed.

Primo Central grouping is based on the existing FRBR workflow, including the grouping process at the database level (the way the Search engine handles grouping) and the Front End functionality. It is used to prevent duplicate records in the results list.

Unfortunately, many records are not added to FRBR groups because the system considers the metadata are not rich enough. With the increase of records provided by (Open Access) aggregators and repositories, the number of duplicate records will certainly not decrease.

Could Ex Libris improve the FRBR workflow for Primo Central records in order to reduce the number of duplicate results and consolidate the FRBR groups?

Examples of duplicate records:
Accuracy of prediction of gene content in large animal populations and its use for candidate gene detection and genetic evaluation
3 results (2 FRBR groups):
- TNproquest195858157 and TNfaoagrisUS201300875183
- TNcrossref10.3168/jds.2007-0231, TNscopus2-s2.0-42449094585, TNsciversesciencedirectelsevierS0022-0302(08)71293-1, TNmedline18349258
- TNorbi2268/23076

Linguistic symbiosis between event loop actors and threads
2 results (1 FRBR group):
- TNsciversesciencedirectelsevierS1477-8424(08)00024-9
- TNscopus2-s2.0-51649125887 and TNcrossref10.1016/j.cl.2008.06.005

Efficient control of transient wave forms to prevent spreading depolarizations
2 results (1 FRBR group):
- TNarxiv0705.3398
- TNscopus2-s2.0-39649117125, TNsciversesciencedirectelsevierS0022-5193(07)00579-6, TNcrossref10.1016/j.jtbi.2007.11.019, TNmedline18177900

Le traitement de la modalité épistémique dans les traductions françaises de On the Origin of Species de Charles Darwin
3 results:
- TNerudit1038687ar
- TNscopus2-s2.0-85017546223
- TN_proquest1870219718

Our users make heavy use of the generate citation button, but they currently have to do this one record at a time. It would make things easier for them if they could pin all the relevant items, and then go into My Account, select all their pinned items, and generate a citation for all of them.

They can currently perform several actions by batch on all pinned items - email results, export to Refworks and so on - but the generate citation action is not yet available to them.

The citation that appears could be simply plaint text, with the citations separated by line breaks.

Hi there,

According to SF case 422111 it's currently not possible to provide detailed statistics about advanced search field through OBI.

As for the facets, we would like to know the number of using field by field.

For example :
- We would like to know how many clicks were done on search field "Topic"
- We would like to know how many clicks were done on search field "Author"
- We would like to know in how many session the search field document type / books was used
- Which are the fields the most used in the advanced search, which are the less used ?

Those statistics would help us to improve our configuration according to patrons' needs.

Thanks for support !

Ariane

Paraphrased omment from one of our patrons:
- When I tag something I have pinned, the entire page has to refresh- which means it jumps all over as images come in etc and can take up to 5 seconds to fully load. Not all browsers act the same. Chrome gets me close to where I was while FireFox is a Magic 8 ball. One time I land back at the record I just tagged, the next, I am 6 records up the list. I'm working my way through my list trying to organize my articles for a lit review - having to wait as the whole page reloads every time I want to add a label and not knowing where I'll be when the page does load is frustrating. There are better ways to do this that wouldn't force the entire page to reload each and every time. This is just painful.

Currently if display of 541 and/or 561 fields in holdings records is enabled in "Holdings Display Customization", 541 and/or 561 fields display in the GetIt section in Primo regardless of the value in the first indicator. If the value in the first indicator is zero then the 541/561 field should not be displayed - this is standard MARC coding (see https://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/hd541.html and https://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/hd561.html ).

Ex Libris proposed a solution to us where when the holdings record is saved the a 541 and/or 561 field with first indicator empty or 1 is copied to a 999 field, and in the Holdings Display Customization table display of the 999 is enabled. We don't feel this is acceptable as it is changing/perverting the source data to accommodate a failing of the Primo software, when Primo should be able to use established MARC coding to display or not display the 541/561 fields in holdings records.