JMC

My feedback

  1. 6 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
    JMC commented  · 

    Yes! This would be very helpful and a real time-saver.

  2. 2 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
    JMC commented  · 

    See -- "Ability to select records to release from MD editor"

  3. 12 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
    JMC commented  · 

    Ooooo. I like this!

  4. 4 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    JMC shared this idea  · 
  5. 46 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
    JMC commented  · 

    To clarify, the most specific thing I am looking for is two additions on the "Scan In Items" page. The first is a "Use/Scan from Set" option, which would then present the user with the list of eligible sets, like happens when running a change holdings job, for instance. The second would be an "Upload/Scan from File" option, which would then prompt you to browse to a .txt or .csv file, as is done for import jobs.

    The efficiency I am seeking is in getting items moved along in a workflow or pushed through to/from transit and other statuses to "Item in Place"

    JMC shared this idea  · 
  6. 43 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    3 comments  ·  Alma » Fulfillment  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    JMC commented  · 

    I concur, but for the opposite reason. Normally, we do NOT want to recall, but rather want to be able to hold the item for an interested patron at whatever point the item is returned and to prevent a RENEWAL. Basically, there is a difference between a hold and a recall, and we need both.

  7. 103 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
    JMC commented  · 

    See also "Add the ability to set individual user preferences or defaults when creating item records."

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    JMC commented  · 

    Would it be possible for there to be multiple "default" options, and the acquisitions operator can select whichever is appropriate? This would allow for more specificity in the holdings record created as part of ordering, because fixed fields could be coded properly for monographs (2=Received and complete or 3=On Order) vs serials (3 or 4=Currently received) and for additional media-specific fields to be included (again, using serials as an example, addition of 852/863/866).

  8. 46 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    4 comments  ·  Alma » Acquisitions  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    JMC commented  · 

    This is similar to "Alma Templates: allow user-by-user customization of default holdings templates" Please consolidate votes :-)

  9. 156 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
    JMC commented  · 

    I support any improved utilization of the detailed and useful information in LC authority records.

    JMC supported this idea  · 
  10. 43 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
    JMC commented  · 

    Yes, please! Will vote up once I have some free votes to spare.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    JMC commented  · 

    See also "'Add next and previous arrows to detail display" in the PRIMO idea exchange

  11. 115 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    JMC supported this idea  · 
  12. 161 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    JMC supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    JMC commented  · 

    I had such high hopes for improvement on this in the new UI. Just spent 2 HOURS getting one new rule moved into the right place so as to function properly. I gave up on the other 2 rules I should have created.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    JMC commented  · 

    I find it unacceptable that this screen/process is so poorly designed. First, new templates insert at either the top or bottom of the list. Second, their position in the list is ESSENTIAL to proper functioning. Third, they can only be moved one place at a time. Forth, after each movement, the page scroll returns you to the top of the list, rather than retaining a position with the selected row near the top or center.

    In order to save myself scrolling back to the bottom each time, I shrink the on-screen font to fit the entire page. At 160 templates, and with my 22" screen flipped vertically, it is shrunk so small that I can barely see the arrows and can pretty much only use the length of the "Rule name" field to know which template I need to move. I've taken to using a handheld magnifier to assist me in this process. Yet, with all these tricks to streamline this arduous task, my latest set of eight rules required an additional 13-15 minutes of my time JUST TO MOVE THEM INTO THE PROPER SORT ORDER. And they only needed to move about 18 positions. I haven't even calculated the enormous wasted time for a new rule that needs to be inserted mid-list.

    PLEASE FIX THIS!

    JMC shared this idea  · 
  13. 42 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
    JMC commented  · 

    I wholehearted support this idea, despite having no votes to give at the moment. ALL fields should be indexed.

  14. 58 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    JMC supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    JMC commented  · 

    I also believe this is the behavior the user expects when entering a comment.

  15. 4 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    JMC supported this idea  · 
  16. 10 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    JMC supported this idea  · 
  17. 8 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    JMC supported this idea  · 
  18. 26 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    JMC supported this idea  · 
  19. 90 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    JMC supported this idea  · 
  20. 36 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    JMC supported this idea  · 
← Previous 1 3

Feedback and Knowledge Base