Simon Read
My feedback
42 results found
-
14 votesSimon Read
shared this idea
·
-
67 votesSimon Read
supported this idea
·
-
47 votesSimon Read
supported this idea
·
-
2 votesSimon Read
shared this idea
·
-
342 votesSimon Read
supported this idea
·
-
82 votesSimon Read
supported this idea
·
-
179 votes
Hi,
This is to update that this issue is still not planned to be developed in the current road map. We will continue to evaluate it for a future release.
Therefore we are keeping this under "Under review" status.
Best regards,
Yael.
Simon Read
supported this idea
·
-
99 votesSimon Read
supported this idea
·
-
60 votesSimon Read
supported this idea
·
-
19 votesSimon Read
supported this idea
·
-
69 votesSimon Read
supported this idea
·
-
47 votes
Thank you again for sharing your idea and for the thoughtful input you've provided. When we first discussed it, I was optimistic about exploring it further,
While I had hoped to prioritize this enhancement, it hasn’t gained the traction we typically look for to move forward. As a result, it’s unlikely to be implemented in the foreseeable future. That said, your feedback remains valuable, and I’ll continue to keep it in mind as our roadmap evolves.
An error occurred while saving the comment Simon Read
shared this idea
·
-
39 votesSimon Read
shared this idea
·
-
36 votesSimon Read
supported this idea
·
-
44 votesSimon Read
supported this idea
·
-
112 votesSimon Read
supported this idea
·
-
56 votesSimon Read
shared this idea
·
-
56 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Simon Read
commented
Thanks Moshe,
We have logged a couple of cases in the past (167336 and 57810). For 57810 we got told to use scan in items and if we wanted it to work for return items that we should submit an enhancement/ideas exchange hence this post. Subsequently that decision has been reversed and some additional development has been committed to.
We hate having to say to staff they should use scan in items for some things and return items for others so we say to staff they should scan an item through return items to determine next steps. This almost always works but there have been a couple of exceptions in the past.
Any other voters for this request like to add an area where return items doesn't fill your needs and you have to use scan in items instead?
Simon
An error occurred while saving the comment Simon Read
commented
An example of where this causes us problems is with the return of on loan items that have a Home Delivery request on them.
All loans are processed through Return Items to determine next steps - in the case of an item with a Home Delivery Request no Home Delivery slip prints. If, however, the item is scanned in via Scan in Items the Home Delivery slip is printed - this is counter intuitive as staff don't know which items have Home Delivery requests on them so they don't know they should scan them in via Scan in Items. It is very confusing for staff.
Simon Read
shared this idea
·
-
14 votesSimon Read
shared this idea
·
-
110 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Simon Read
commented
Currently the patron purge functionality works based on the purge date.
It would be nice if there was an option to choose to use the expiry date rather than the purge date - we find that staff often forget to change the purge date when they extend the expiry date for patrons so using the expiry date would be more reliable.
Simon Read
supported this idea
·
Hi Dana,
Thanks for the update. I've tested the hourly booking functionality and as far as I can see the end date and time does not automatically populate the request form in either Alma or Primo. I can't find specific mention of the auto population in the release notes either - just mention of the ability to change to hourly bookings rather than bookings by minute. How are we meant to activate the functionality?