Skip to content

François Renaville

My feedback

35 results found

  1. 8 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    François Renaville commented  · 

    Hi Sean,
    There is a similar issue between Alma and the Primo MyAccount. KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm and University of Liège consider this rather as a "bug" for which no enhancement should be asked: interoperability between Alma and Primo should indeed be maximal by default (see our cases #00438186 and #00450129).
    Regards,
    François

  2. 14 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    François Renaville commented  · 

    Also ideally: this excellent suggestion should be applied to Primo BO in a near future release, without necessarily going through the Idea Exchange process. I see this a basic UX expectation and requirement from Primo administrators...

    François Renaville supported this idea  · 
  3. 89 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    François Renaville supported this idea  · 
  4. 47 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    François Renaville supported this idea  · 
  5. 36 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Content  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    François Renaville supported this idea  · 
  6. 39 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Content  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    François Renaville supported this idea  · 
  7. 28 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Alma » Other  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    François Renaville supported this idea  · 
  8. 2 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    François Renaville supported this idea  · 
  9. 78 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    François Renaville supported this idea  · 
  10. 19 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Primo » Other  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    François Renaville supported this idea  · 
  11. 22 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    François Renaville commented  · 

    I agree this feature would be useful for end-users.
    I would like to add that customers should be able to customize by language the way months are displayed, in full (MMMM > January, February…) or in brief (MMM > Jan, Feb…).
    For institutions using Alma/Primo in other languages than English, Alma should be able to support a translation for the months so that it is coherent in the letters.

    François Renaville supported this idea  · 
  12. 176 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    5 comments  ·  Alma » Other  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    François Renaville commented  · 

    Thanks! You put your finger on it, Anonymous, and are right! Codes and data are closely linked, particularly when structure and hierarchy come into the picture! Good point! I’m mortified… :-/

    We recently refreshed our Standard Sandbox and have added very few data since then. There are currently more than 120,000 bibliographic records, 39 active ledgers and funds, 650 POLs, 450 users... Do we really need 120,000 bib records in the IZ Standard Sandbox? I don’t think so. I would be happy with many less; I can always import or manually add and create what I need.

    Since it is true that production configuration in the Sandbox makes really sense with real data from the institution, we could consider the following scenario:
    -100% of the Alma Production CONFIGURATION copied on the Standard Sandbox
    - 2% of the Alma Production DATA copied on the Standard Sandbox

    This scenario would allow codes, etc. to match the appropriate data and make testing effective for some cases. But with a sample of 2% we can certainly not expect to always come to a correct mapping. Not difficult to imagine the problems in case of a POL is copied to the Sandbox and if the associated interested user is not part of the sample, if an invoice is copied without the associated POL, if an item has been requested by a non-copied user... There must certainly be solutions to avoid this situation, but no doubt that this would also make the whole thing much more difficult to implement… Why not only a sample of the Repository and User data that would be migrated? We can always easily create the POLs, invoices, loans, requests... we need for our tests.

    Of course, there must be other possible scenarios! And upgrading to the Premium Sandbox would still make sense for institutions that need or want all their data and can pay for such additional service.

    I agree with you that the usefulness of the Standard Sandbox is limited without our own data. But I find it easier to add the few data we really need for staff training, testing of setup scenarios, new enhancements, etc. rather than manually duplicating the whole Production configuration in our Sandbox.

    Moreover, if Ex Libris still plans to allow customers to go further in testing the Alma releases and still hopes the customers will help them to detect bugs and issues asap and if possible before the new release being implemented in the Production environments, so that we all (politically correct) "enjoy a better release experience", then it makes really sense for customers to have an understandable and meaningful configuration in their Sandbox. I cannot go very far in testing new releases with an OOTB config...

    And thanks again for your relevant comments!

    François Renaville supported this idea  · 
    François Renaville shared this idea  · 
  13. 9 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  Alma » Other  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    François Renaville commented  · 

    Hi Heng,

    We have a different colur schema for Production and Sandbox: blue for prod and green for Sandbox. The institution logo on the top left corner of the screen is also different.
    This can be configured with a General Administrator role. Go to: Administration > General Configuration > Configuration Menu > Branding/Logo > Alma Logo and Color Scheme.
    Regards,

    François

  14. 93 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    François Renaville supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    François Renaville commented  · 

    @ Corinna: The provided example is indeed meaningful and unsatisfactory, certainly source of confusion for the users! However, in the case of HathiTrust, I have got the impression that most of the time the journal title is followed by volume and year indications (like in https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?field1=ocr;q1=cahiers%20de%20la%20documentation;a=srchls or https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?field1=ocr;q1=journal%20of%20comparative%20literature;a=srchls). This is much clearer, although in contradiction with the traditional library cataloguing norms. I assume that in that same case, only records at the item level (with their handle) are harvested and integrated into PCI, and not records at the journal level. Since PCI currently includes 4 different HathiTrust collections (for US customers and non-US customers, records for material in the public domain, as well as material that is restricted due to copyright), I think it makes really sense to work at the item level. Beside the ‘Journal issue’ type, much more important for me is that Open Access HathiTrust collections only contain materials which customers and end-users may have access to… this is unfortunately not always the case (see #00175079)... :-(

    François Renaville shared this idea  · 
  15. 18 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    François Renaville supported this idea  · 
2 Next →

Feedback and Knowledge Base