Thank you for changing some filters into facets, but in order to make better use of this functionality, we would like to add more facets.
It would be a great improvement if we could have Academic Department, Course Terms and Assignee as facets as well.
Then we could easily sort the list to match each liasion librarians need for easy overview to his/her's Reading List Task List.
The facets we have today doesn't help very much in order to filter the list into a manageable task list.
Maybe it could be possible to customize the facets in the same way as we customize the view in Alma?

In the July 2018 release notes a new feature was described for showing shelf other titles located on the same or adjacent shelves near the citation.
In Primo we have the virtual browse configured to include ebooks that have an LC classification in the bib record. We think the shelf recommendations in Leganto should be extended to accommodate ebooks in a similar way. Especially as more of our budget is going to online books.

I logged a case asking for it, and Ex Libris has indicated that it sounds beneficial for other other customers, and requested that we garner support via the Ideas Exchange.

Once a Leganto user has liked a citation, they are not able to change their mind and "unlike" it.

Across social media the pattern is that “likes” can be removed – and this is what our students/instructors would expect.

• In training, or in class when demonstrating the feature, and then wanting to reverse it
• Accidentally clicking the Like
• Liking a citation, and then realising it was a different one that you wanted to like
• Liking a citation and then changing your mind

Consideration should be given to whether liking/unliking is locked once a list is "inactive". Perhaps this could be configurable by institution.

Some institutions may wish to turn off "Liking" altogether.

To ensure that the LTI link works between our LMS and Alma we have to create a Course Record for all units that utilise the LMS. This results in thousands of Course Records being created in Alma each semester. However since not all units in the LMS use a Reading List only a fraction of these Course Records eventually have a Reading List attached. Therefore we have a lot of empty Course Records in Alma cluttering up the Course area in Alma and resulting in some confusion for Library staff in identifying active, current courses.

This problem will only continue to grow as we import thousands more empty courses each semester.

For this reason we would like an easy way within Alma or in Analytics to be able to identify Course Records that do not have a Reading List attached. Although there is a field in Analytics for 'Reading List Associated to a Course', filtering this field to "No" does not provide a list of Courses that do not have a Reading List attached. It would be incredibly useful if we could also run a job that will delete Courses without reading lists attached in bulk easily.

Sometimes instructors perform a citation search in Leganto and just add the first result that comes up in the search results; often this is actually a book review or other format that isn't logical for reserves. Additionally, most instructors are searching and expecting the latest edition to appear first in the list. Other faculty from certain departments want to choose a particular edition, and so need edition information prominently surfaced in the search result.

This results in processing delays as staff must check with instructors to clarify what items they really intended to place on reserve.

One possible solution may be to offer an option for faculty to specially indicate that the submitted citation must be filled as specified (format/edition). Something could indicate that by default, any available edition can be substituted for the one added to the list as a result of search.

We think the field for material type should be moved to the top of the Editing form.
This makes sense for several reasons.
- It makes sense to define a document before registering it, and that’s where cataloguers start.
- Different document types have different sets of fields, and choosing the material type first would ensure that the instructor starts registering in the correct form.
- When changing the material type during the process, some fields may move or disappear, including fields the instructor had just been working on, leading to a poor user experience.
- User creating a chapter citation naturally start filling in the title field with the chapter title, only to discover that this field was for the book title when changing the material type = double work = poor user experience.

As Library staff, I would like the Roll Over List button to be placed at a more obvious spot in Leganto, so instructors can easily find the button and Rollover their Lists with fewer clicks.

UNSW Library will enable the Leganto Course Instructor Rollover in November 2018. We want instructors to use this feature, and not be confused with the Duplicate List option.

Current Behavior:
1. Instructor opens a Reading List in Leganto
2. clicks on Reading list options menu option
3. selects "Roll Over List", which is beneath "Duplicate List"
Concerns:
a. They need to know where the button is
b. They need to understand the difference between Duplicate List and Roll Over List
c. The Library want to encourage instructors to use Rollover instead of Duplicate.

Proposed Behavior:
1. Instructor opens a Reading List in Leganto
2. clicks on a ROLL OVER LIST button which is next to "SEND LIST" button
Benefits:
a. Fewer steps for instructors
b. Button can be easily found
c. Tooltips can be used for the button (same as the "SEND LIST" tooltip), to help instructors to understand what this function does
d. Prevent instructors from clicking on Duplicate List button either accidentally or due to lack of understanding on the differences between the 2 functionalities