Laura Akerman

My feedback

  1. 430 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Laura Akerman commented  · 

    The effect of this from the few tests I've done - is that for a single word search the results for "Is (exact)" are the same as "contains". If Ex Libris intended to offer an Advanced search type for a phrase search, they should label it "Contains phrase" (although I think most users know how to use the quote marks - they learned from Google). My first impulse is, "this type of search isn't working, we should put in a SalesForce case". If Primo can no longer execute this kind of search for some reason, I hope Ex Libris will let us know and change the labelling on that search type. But true Exact search is really what we need!

    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
  2. 338 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    6 comments  ·  Primo » Primo VE  ·  Admin →
    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
  3. 499 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
  4. 12 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Laura Akerman shared this idea  · 
  5. 8 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
  6. 470 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Laura Akerman commented  · 

    What I would hope is that a better "solution" than either dedup or FRBR could be found for bringing together different instances of the same "expression" or edition - same content - of a work.

    How about - from any record, I'd like users to easily be able to see other records for other formats or issuances of the same content, whether physical or electronic, in CDI or local resources (whether from Alma or other sources). This would have to be based on identifiers, as it is now (the dedup and frbr processes create shared identifiers), but those identifiers, whether machine-generated or human generated, should be stored as part of the metadata in a way that allows customers to see what is happening and fix mistakes, at least on their end.

    I hope Ex Libris is at least thinking in this direction. In the meantime, clustering (but not deduping please! Since we have no control over CDI metadata) local and CDI records would be of great value.

    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
  7. 7 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
  8. 7 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
  9. 40 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Laura Akerman shared this idea  · 
  10. 55 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Laura Akerman commented  · 

    Agree with Steve McDonald. A job to match and convert LCSH in 655 to LCGFT if desired by the customer and if an appropriate match can be found, would need to change the vocabulary indications - this could be a desirable enhancement, but the current behavior is a bug. Keeping the vocabularies straight is crucial as we look toward linked data conversion

  11. 13 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Laura Akerman commented  · 

    Marcus,

    What about the Client Common Titles.txt file? Could you use that? (https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Primo/Product_Documentation/Technical_Guide/180Files_Used_by_the_Dedup_Algorithm#ClientCommonTitles.txt all the way at the bottom)

    All the way at the bottom.

    Unfortunately, apparently it's accessed by the Serials matching profile only -- there's no corresponding file for monographs.

    Laura

  12. 4 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Laura Akerman shared this idea  · 
  13. 76 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  Alma » Acquisitions  ·  Admin →
    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
  14. 34 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Alma » Other  ·  Admin →
    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
  15. 28 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
  16. 75 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Laura Akerman commented  · 

    Oops, I'm out of votes but let me lend support for this.

    I'd like it to be something we could handle in normalization rules and something we could control on the individual record basis if need be.

    We did all kinds of extremely time-wasting workarounds to get, for example, our print serial records to come out on tip of the skimpy SFX serial records (basically, by adding 856's to them so they would become "electronic").

    Now that we're no longer using SFX, and Alma Community Zone records are "better" for the most part, we still occasionally see dedups where the choice of preferred record is unfortunate. Nothing we can do....

    I could swear that at one time, I saw a configuration for choice of preferred record for dedups... in some odd place like the General Configuration maybe... but I can't find it now.

  17. 110 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Laura Akerman commented  · 

    Ah, that is a problem! Sorry I missed looking at the attachment.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Laura Akerman commented  · 

    I don't understand this request - can't you just add the subfield p to your normalization rules for diplay/title? It seems to be in the ALMA MARC template for Primo so I'm assuming you lack it because your rules have been around awhile and don't have it.
    Our subfield p's are displaying - including in the e-shelf. Here's an example:
    http://discovere.emory.edu/discovere:default_scope:01EMORY_ALMA21159316240002486
    This shouldn't need to be an enhancement.

  18. 197 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
  19. 76 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
  20. 148 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Laura Akerman supported this idea  · 
← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base