Skip to content

Esploro

← Have an idea for Ex Libris?

Your feedback matters to us. Help us improve Esploro by telling us what you’d like to see using the message areas below. You can also can support something already posted.

We would love to be able to respond to every idea that is submitted, but this is not feasible. We are, however, committed to responding to the most popular ideas—those that have received the most points.

For more information please review our FAQ and guidelines. Thank you.


How can we improve Esploro?

You've used all your votes and won't be able to post a new idea, but you can still search and comment on existing ideas.

There are two ways to get more votes:

  • When an admin closes an idea you've voted on, you'll get your votes back from that idea.
  • You can remove your votes from an open idea you support.
  • To see ideas you have already voted on, select the "My feedback" filter and select "My open ideas".
(thinking…)

Enter your idea and we'll search to see if someone has already suggested it.

If a similar idea already exists, you can support and comment on it.

If it doesn't exist, you can post your idea so others can support it.

Enter your idea and we'll search to see if someone has already suggested it.

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback

3 results found

  1. Enhance Smart Expansion via Bibtex by adding CDI auto population job

    When importing records via Bibtex files, records are created but fail to sync with the journal details like Peer Review and Open Access status. When you open the record, both fields are marked as unknown but when you "refresh" the journal name, it seems to retrieve the data necessary to populate these fields. Is it possible to create a separate or subsequent CDI auto population job that matches and updates the journal information for any Smart Expansion via bibtext job so that these don't have to be fixed manually by going to each assert?

    Even if there was an intermediary…

    2 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  Smart Harvesting  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  2. Add DOI/No DOI as a Facet to Smart Harvest author matching

    Articles with DOIs are easier to verify because you can click the DOI and review the published version of record.

    We would like a "has DOI" and "NO DOI" facet because this would speed up Smart Harvest author matching, and potentially allow lower-level staff to review.

    Staff could review "has DOI" matching and check the published version to verify affiliation. Records requiring more review or investigation could be left for higher-level staff.

    7 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Smart Harvesting  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  3. Add research topics at "add researcher" step within record

    When a researcher is incorrectly matched, we often have to create a new non-affiliated one in the record. We can add their affiliation, but we can't add research topics. If the name is common, we have to look them up by researcher and add the research topics.

    It would be more efficient to add research topics (as keywords) during this step.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Smart Harvesting  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
  • Don't see your idea?

Esploro

Categories

Feedback and Knowledge Base

(thinking…)