Deborah Fitchett
My feedback
39 results found
-
34 votesDeborah Fitchett
supported this idea
·
-
9 votesDeborah Fitchett
shared this idea
·
-
6 votesDeborah Fitchett
shared this idea
·
-
1 voteDeborah Fitchett
shared this idea
·
-
13 votesDeborah Fitchett
shared this idea
·
-
44 votesDeborah Fitchett
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment -
3 votesDeborah Fitchett
supported this idea
·
Deborah Fitchett
shared this idea
·
-
63 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Deborah Fitchett
commented
For #1 I think I'd disable Patron along with the other roles - if the account's compromised then the unauthorised person shouldn't get even that access either.
For #1 and #2 while I agree with skipping the need to save the user record (so easy to forget when in a panic!) it should have a pop up "are you sure you want to ..." confirmation in case of accidental clicking.
Deborah Fitchett
supported this idea
·
-
6 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Deborah Fitchett
commented
A specific use case: we have some questions set up that result in:
* question 1 - tags to put physical books on short loan
* question 2 - tags to request more licenses/restrict downloads of ebooksCurrently we display these to lecturers but don't let them edit them later, even though it would be useful for them to do so if they change their mind. This is because if we enable editing of these tags, they appear as options on all material types, which adds clutter and confusion. So instead we have to turn off the option entirely, and if they want to take something off 2-hour loan they have to email / use the Discuss feature instead of simply removing the tag.
-
15 votesDeborah Fitchett
supported this idea
·
Deborah Fitchett
shared this idea
·
-
55 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Deborah Fitchett
commented
One complication is, when date ranges overlap, whether they should be sorted by the start date or the end date. My instinct is that this would depend on whether the date is ascending or descending, eg:
Sort by start date ascending:
Holding A 1990 - 2010
Holding B 1995 - 2000
Holding C 2005 - present (ie 2022)Sort by end date descending
Holding C 2005 - present (ie 2022)
Holding A 1990 - 2010
Holding B 1995 - 2000Would others agree?
Deborah Fitchett
supported this idea
·
-
8 votesDeborah Fitchett
shared this idea
·
-
43 votesDeborah Fitchett
supported this idea
·
-
34 votesDeborah Fitchett
supported this idea
·
-
24 votesDeborah Fitchett
shared this idea
·
-
64 votesDeborah Fitchett
supported this idea
·
-
99 votesDeborah Fitchett
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Deborah Fitchett
commented
Speaking for my library, we want to be able to move the "Send-to" section below the "Get it" section.
I've got some neat Angular from another library that lets me switch pretty much any other section. But when I try to switch Get It and Send To, it gets very confused about where to put the 'sign in' message (this appears to be calculated by assuming Get It will always be second in order....)
-
45 votes
-
44 votesDeborah Fitchett
supported this idea
·
Bother, I've run out of votes and will have to see what I can scrounge from elsewhere, but in the meantime I want to register my agreement with this idea. The whole point of a workflow is that it starts, proceeds, then ends. It makes no sense for a workflow note to persist after the end of the workflow itself, and has the potential to cause a great deal of confusion in cases where the workflow may (or may not) recur in future academic years.