When our users look for a book in the Primo Search Portal they expect that the Primo Search behaves like a Google Search, i.e. they expect that Primo finds books with titles or metadata containing words similar to those in their query. Unfortunately, the Primo Search is very sensitive to the exact spelling of the words in the query. If the search query is slightly inaccurate, the book is not found in Primo. I tried such unsuccessful search queries on www.amazon.de, and Amazon usually found the correct book: Amazon showed the correct hit on top of the list (see attachment). This shows that the search algorithms of Amazon are clearly superior to those of Primo. I feel that Ex Libris should take steps to keep up with modern search technologies.
Some, but not all, of Primo’s shortcomings seem rather easy to fix. Primo fails to take word flexions in non-English languages into account. Since the endings of German words not only depend on plural and singular but also on the context, Primo’s search results for German queries are overly sensitive to word flexions. However, some of the English examples indicate that improving Primo’s dictionaries will not be sufficient. Over the long term, ExLibris may consider to team up with a specialized search provider.

Similar proposals in ExLibris idea exchange
https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308176-primo/suggestions/37586617-increase-primo-search-capability-to-support-major
https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/564566-summon/suggestions/17415091-automatically-searching-for-the-corrected-spelling

We would like to have more flexibility with Primo VE resource types and the related facet and prefilter values. There are situations in which we would like to be able to add records to an OTB resource display type that don't meet the OTB conditions. For example, for certain textual integrating resources that users are likely to think of as books, we use conditions based on the presence of form/genre headings to add them to the OTB ""book"" display type in Primo BO (e.g., open textbooks that are periodically updated: https://searchit.libraries.wsu.edu/permalink/f/j5jme3/CP71251613210001451). Conversely, we would sometimes like to be able to exclude records from a particular OTB display type.
Here are two possible ways to accomplish this request:
1) Make the OTB resource display type rules locally editable.
2) Use a local field to override the OTB resource display type rule. For example, 999 $a could be defined as the local override field for resource types. Each OTB resource type could be associated with a code that could be added to 999 $a to force that record to have that OTB resource type.

Conditions could be added to the OTB rules as follows in this example for conference proceedings:
--If 999 is null, then execute the standard OTB rule for conference proceedings
--If 999 is not null, then check if 999 = ""conferenceproceeding""
-----If 999 = ""conferenceproceeding"" then mark record as conference proceeding #force include
-----If 999 != ""conference_proceeding"" then do nothing #force exclude

In Primo you can activate autocomplete to get suggestions for search-queries based on what the end-user begins to type in the search-box.

We have tested the functionality and see that it could be useful for the end user to get these suggestions. However we see that the suggestions from the central index in some cases are a little strange and that you get suggestions from the entire index and not only the sources the institution has activated. This means that the end-user could get suggestions that gives 0 results.

If you get a suggestion that leads to nothing you will think that it was a bad suggestions and maybe not use the feature again. That reflects badly on the reputation of the system and institution.

We would like that this functionality is changed so that the users only gets suggestions from sources that are activated for search.

This to prevent that the get suggestions that leads to 0 results.

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.

In the brief and full display pages, libraries can display information contained in data fields (such as the title, author, and creation date) from the source record. This information helps users to differentiate records quickly. In some cases, there can be a lot of information that is displayed. This is particularly the case when Contributor is added: all 7XX fields are added, and in their entirety (see for example in the attached screenshot).

We would like an option that would allow the library to either limit the number of fields to display (for example max 3 7XX fields) or to only display fields based on the content of some subfields (for example: only display 7XX where $$e equals 'editor', 'publishing director ', 'translator', 'Director', 'film director'...).

An institution owns a specific edition of a book, ex:https://bibsys-almaprimo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid=BIBSYS_ILS71566408110002201&context=L&vid=SSHF&search_scope=default_scope&isFrbr=true&tab=alle_bibliotek&lang=no_NO

When extending the search scope to other libraries, they may find other editions of the book, which they don’t own (https://bibsys-almaprimo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid=BIBSYS_ILS71566408110002201&context=L&vid=SSHF&search_scope=blended_scope&isFrbr=true&tab=alle_bibliotek&lang=no_NO ).

The original/owned book's barcode is shown for the other edition(s) as well. This is unfortunate as it is quite confusing (contradictory messages, give the impression the library owns resources it doesn’t), and can lead the user to order the wrong book.

The availability status is correct but the holdings information is not. The ISBN should be used here to prevent tis from happening, instead of the holdings being based on the title only.

According to Ex Libris (#00628723), this is by design: " this issue is indeed connected to the FRBR-grouping of the two records - because they are FRBR-grouped, you can see the items for both records in each of them".

The only solution is to disable the FRBR-grouping. This is not an option for us to have it disabled in the local index, so we are hereby suggesting that another solution be found, preventing the problem described here, while having FRBR-grouping enabled.

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.

The open discovery of the new UI allows customers to customize the new UI, extend its functionalities, and connect Primo with external services.
This framework can offer an important added value to institutions; it can enable them to respond to specific needs of their user community.
We want to implement extensions for functionalities like:
• Offer a button “report a problem” that allows a user to report a broken link or another problem with a specific source he found. The form sends this message to our helpdesk, together with useful debug info like : is the user on or off campus, browser version used, search query, pnx-id,.. and his e-mail address when he is signed in. Our e-resources staff finds this functionality extremely useful: more linking issues are reported now and they can be handled in a more efficient way.
• Offer a button “Pay fines” that allows a user to pay fines online. The button is only displayed when the user has fines.

These are extensions that we currently implemented in our old UI.
But creating extensions that make use of session data (like user email, vid, …) are time consuming and risk full:
• Time consuming because documentation is limited not to say non-existing, this requires reading the code. It has a high maintenance cost since after every release, extensions can break and it is difficult to find out why because of the lack of clear release notes.
• It is risk full because we don’t know whether we will be able to fix the functionality in the two weeks between release on staging and production. It is also risk full because we don’t know if the extensions will still work after the transition to Angular 2.

Our request is :
Please provide us with session data in every component so we can quickly create components.
One way to make the extensions manageable and future proof, is to use a data model (see primo-explore-dom). If the data is framework agnostic it will become more portable and working with data is easier and almost timeless.
This way everybody can develop within the reach of their skillset and more institutions would be able to take profit of the open discovery framework.
But we are open to any solution to overcome the issues mentioned.

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

Primo supports display of See references (not same as See Also) in browse headings, if those cross-references are in the bibliographic data ingested by Primo. There is no capacity to display See Also and Usage info from authority records, which are important so that users understand how and why certain terms, especially subjects, may be used.

We propose that See Also and Usage info display in the Browse headings.

Example headings and See Also and Usage info that does NOT currently display in Primo:

Blacks:

Search also under: subdivision Blacks under individual wars, e.g. World War, 1939-1945--Blacks; and headings beginning with the word Black
Here are entered works on blacks as an element in the population. Theoretical works discussing the black race from an anthropological point of view are entered under Black race.

It's possible this enhancement could be achieved through application of an API that interacts with Library of Congress systems. Display of narrow/broader terms would also be highly valuable.

Currently, Analytics possibilities for "Collection Discovery" are rather limited. With action “Display a Collection”, you can for example see how many times your collections (all together) have been displayed, added to favorites... in a period of time, but you cannot see which collections are the most and the less successful, what materials should maybe be more promoted, which collection should maybe be removed because its content is maybe of too little interest, which collections are added to favorites, etc.

Therefore, we would like Collection IDs and Collection Names to be transferred to Primo Analytics. Additionally, if this could also be done for collection items (MMS ID and Title), this would be very useful too!