We would like the Owner Subscription Letter to activate when instructors are automatically set as owners to corresponding reading lists. We would like this to happen on rollover as well.

The Leganto Notification Letter is to imprecise to function well as information for the instructors when they have been added as owners to a reading list.

We can't see why the OWS only triggers when you are added as an owner when in Leganto, or when added in Alma and you actively choose "Send E-mail".

Now we need to retrieve the contact information from Course Reserves in Analytics. Since these data is delivered with multiple instructors in each row, you need to work on these data in order to split each and every instructor into single rows. You then have to send an e-mail with "global" information, since it would be way to time consuming to give each and every one of the owners a notification containing only information on their reading list(s).

Currently the 'Reports' link (attached) in Leganto just links to an 'out the box' analytics dashboard displaying a range of usage information.

It would be useful to be able to define a path to our own Analytics dashboard in an Alma code table, e.g. in Fulfilment > Leganto > Customer Settings.

Our analytics report would be set to receive filters/parameters from Leganto, i.e. reading list codes.

Academic engagement forms a significant part of the work we do with reading lists, so being able to be flexible and responsive to their needs/wishes in terms of usage of their lists would definitely be a benefit for us.

This idea was originally posted as Alma idea ( https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173-alma/suggestions/36648628-notify-when-a-title-esp-electronic-portfolio-ch ) but it is probably more a Leganto improvement. Therefore I post it here.

Especially when dealing with electronic titles, for example when importing them, Alma may delete some portfolios.
However, researchers may have previously selected these portfolios for their Leganto reading list. But nobody would notice that, until the students find a broken link in Leganto.

To avoid that right now we perform a manual check, relying on an Analysis looking for Electronic Titles selected for reading lists before running the import, and comparing that with the list of deleted portfolio we have when the import is finished. It's however time consuming.

It would be much better to get a notification when the deleted title was previously included in a leganto reading list, so that the librarian can replace the related entry with an alternative copy.

The issue is esp. relevant to electronic titles, however it may also occur with physical titles that are withdrawn, an implementation of such a warning for both electronic and physical titles would be the best solution.

We've noticed that the alma delivery skin in Leganto does not match the Primo delivery skin, and so customizations to the delivery skin in order to get things working in Primo are not available. There is no option to customize the default OTB leganto delivery skin.
Example use case for this would be where for personal delivery purposes the hold shelf for a library has to be available, but cannot be disabled from displaying except via CSS hiding in the delivery skin CSS.
The suggestion would be to allow the specification of a specific delivery skin to be used within leganto. This could be the default primo delivery skin, but it could also be a custom skin, depending on what customizations were required for users viewing the results in leganto.
At the moment, it doen't look like the Primo delivery skin has any leganto CSS components, so maybe it would require a separate CSS file in the skin just for leganto.

Physical (print) and electronic (ebook) availability cannot be added as columns in these Analytics subject areas. This would be hugely beneficial for most of our daily reports and workflows as we try to ensure that a certain number of copies or electronic versions are available for resources added to reading lists.

An additional requirement is for availability to be shown for records related to the citation. This is because we have separate title records for physical (print) holdings and electronic (ebook) portfolios, and use the related_records parameter in Leganto Customer Settings to display availability for all available formats at citation level.

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.

We have three kinds of content:
* copyrighted material - should never be OA
* teacher-created content that they want to keep to their class only
* teacher-created content that they'd like to share with other teachers and/or use to promote their class

To accommodate this third group, we'd like functionality that would let teachers tag content they've uploaded to be made open access. Functionality should:

* make teachers confirm they (or the university as their employer) own the IP

* let them choose a Creative Commons license

* provide a permalink for the item where it's accessible publically

* provide a platform where the public can search and browse all the institution's open access content

* provide a platform where teachers can search and browse materials from the whole the Leganto community, and easily add to their own class reading lists

* provide a machine-readable way for other OER/content aggregators to harvest metadata about the content (eg DigitalNZ harvests OA teaching materials from our Equella repository using OAI-PMH)

There are various ways to export a list, but the general feedback we get from the consortium is that there is often something missing and/or some elements are irrelevant:
Excel: tags are not included, and there are too many columns otherwise.
Word: with Apa or Chicago, public notes are not included; with the expanded reading style, tags are included, but not in a way that can help sort the citations, and physical location is irrelevant.
The pdf export contains some of this information but is not very print friendly.

In other words, none of the export options covers entirely the customers' needs, and all of our customers' needs are different.
The only way to accomodate all of them would be to let them choose which information they want to include the moment they're exporting a list, at least for some of the formats.

- Select which citations should be exported
Users are able to filter the list by tags or search words, and retrieve only the citations they are interested in. Exporting only these citations/the filtered list, would be a nice improvement, and save some sorting and deleting in for example Excel.

- Select which fields should be included
The export should include basic bibliographic details, and allow the user to choose, in the formats where it's relevant, which fields to add as well.
Tags, public notes, physical location, should be optional but possible to include.
Relevant formats are especially Excel, where the user can further sort the exported data, PDF, and Word for non standard citation styles.

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.