My feedback

15 results found

1. Wikidata URIs

   68 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   1 comment  ·  Alma » Linked Data  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating
   Anonymous supported this idea  ·  Dec 9, 2025

2. Enable us to display items in an "Unavailable" location type as Unavailable in Primo

   •  

   267 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   8 comments  ·  Alma » Resource Management - Physical  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating
   AdminTamar Fuches (Alma product manager, Ex Libris) responded

   Dear colleagues,

   Thank you for raising this idea.

   This was part of the CERV cycle in 2025, but did not make it to the final list.

   During the analysis, 3 possible approaches were discussed, each has a different estimation and effort:

   Option 1: New dedicated process type

   • It will be possible to mark specific items as "unavailable", similarly to the way it is possible to mark them as "missing"
   • Items marked as "unavailable" will be considered as "not in place"
   • The new "unavailable" option will appear as a possible process type in all the places where there is a list of process types, including configuration options such as Fulfillment Unit Rules

   Option 2: Mark a location as "unavailable"

   • It will be possible to mark a location as "unavailable"
   • All items in this location will be considered as "not in place"
   • The difference from option 1 is that when an item is in an "unavailable" location, it can still be in a process such as loan, work order or any other process type. These are 2 separate attributes
   • The existing options for location based configuration can be used

   Option 3: A new "unavailable" field in item level

   • It will be possible to mark specific items as "unavailable", similar to the availability status of portfolios
   • Items marked as "unavailable" will be considered as "not in place"
   • Similar to option 2, "unavailable" item can still be in a process such as loan, work order or any other process type. These are 2 separate attributes
   • As this is a new attribute, relevant configuration options will need to be enhanced to take this attribute into consideration. Further analysis will be needed here

   Although option 3 might give more flexibility, it is super complicated and would require huge effort. Therefore, the selected option is option 2: Mark a location as "unavailable".

   The description of this idea exchange sounds like this option, however in the comments I saw some references to option 3. Therefore I wanted to share with you the analysis and discussion - you can see it in: https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/ERLrkhNUHtTYerEiaQAsG2uT

   Please note that as this did not make it to the final list of the CERV selected items, there is no timeline for implementing this.

   Thanks,

   Tamar Fuches

   Alma product team

   Dear colleagues,

   Thank you for raising this idea.

   This was part of the CERV cycle in 2025, but did not make it to the final list.

   During the analysis, 3 possible approaches were discussed, each has a different estimation and effort:

   Option 1: New dedicated process type

   • It will be possible to mark specific items as "unavailable", similarly to the way it is possible to mark them as "missing"
   • Items marked as "unavailable" will be considered as "not in place"
   • The new "unavailable" option will appear as a possible process type in all the places where there is a list of process types, including configuration options such as Fulfillment Unit Rules

   Option 2: Mark a location as "unavailable"

   • It will be possible to mark a location as "unavailable"
   • All items in this location will be considered as "not in place"
   • The difference from option 1 is that when an item… more
   Anonymous supported this idea  ·  Oct 17, 2025

3. Make it possible to mark items as "unavailable"

   93 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   1 comment  ·  Alma » Resource Management - Physical  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating
   AdminTamar Fuches (Alma product manager, Ex Libris) responded

   Dear colleagues,

   Thank you for raising this idea.

   This idea is related to another one - https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173/suggestions/48370850, which was part of the CERV cycle in 2025, but did not make it to the final list.

   During the analysis, 3 possible approaches were discussed, each has a different estimation and effort:

   Option 1: New dedicated process type

   • It will be possible to mark specific items as "unavailable", similarly to the way it is possible to mark them as "missing"
   • Items marked as "unavailable" will be considered as "not in place"
   • The new "unavailable" option will appear as a possible process type in all the places where there is a list of process types, including configuration options such as Fulfillment Unit Rules

   Option 2: Mark a location as "unavailable"

   • It will be possible to mark a location as "unavailable"
   • All items in this location will be considered as "not in place"
   • The difference from option 1 is that when an item is in an "unavailable" location, it can still be in a process such as loan, work order or any other process type. These are 2 separate attributes
   • The existing options for location based configuration can be used

   Option 3: A new "unavailable" field in item level

   • It will be possible to mark specific items as "unavailable", similar to the availability status of portfolios
   • Items marked as "unavailable" will be considered as "not in place"
   • Similar to option 2, "unavailable" item can still be in a process such as loan, work order or any other process type. These are 2 separate attributes
   • As this is a new attribute, relevant configuration options will need to be enhanced to take this attribute into consideration. Further analysis will be needed here

   The description here, on this idea, is actually option 3.

   During the analysis we identified that

   although option 3 might give more flexibility, it is super complicated and would require huge effort. Therefore, the recommended option is option 2: Mark a location as "unavailable".

   Do you think that implementing option 2 is enough? in that case, a dummy location "Unavailable" can be utilized for marking specific items by assigning them this location.

   I want to share with you the analysis and discussion - you can see it in: https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/ERLrkhNUHtTYerEiaQAsG2uT

   Please let me know your thoughts.

   Thanks,

   Tamar Fuches

   Alma product team

   Dear colleagues,

   Thank you for raising this idea.

   This idea is related to another one - https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173/suggestions/48370850, which was part of the CERV cycle in 2025, but did not make it to the final list.

   During the analysis, 3 possible approaches were discussed, each has a different estimation and effort:

   Option 1: New dedicated process type

   • It will be possible to mark specific items as "unavailable", similarly to the way it is possible to mark them as "missing"
   • Items marked as "unavailable" will be considered as "not in place"
   • The new "unavailable" option will appear as a possible process type in all the places where there is a list of process types, including configuration options such as Fulfillment Unit Rules

   Option 2: Mark a location as "unavailable"

   • It will be possible to mark a location as "unavailable"
   • All items in this location will be considered as "not in place"
   • The… more
   Anonymous supported this idea  ·  Oct 16, 2025

4. Ability to change location of message notifications

   •  

   4 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Alma » Other  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating
   Anonymous supported this idea  ·  Aug 28, 2025

5. Import Profiles - support mapping to E-Collection

   25 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Alma » Resource Management - Electronic  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating
   Anonymous supported this idea  ·  Jul 24, 2025

6. Remove 'Level URL' from CZ collections

   6 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Alma » Resource Management - Electronic  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating
   Anonymous supported this idea  ·  Jul 18, 2025

7. Improve search "electronic titles" to include results with and without inventory

   30 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   2 comments  ·  Alma » Resource Management - Electronic  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating
   An error occurred while saving the comment
   Anonymous commented  ·  May 16, 2025  ·  Edit…  ·  Delete…

   I'd like to see the descriptive records for electronic collections appear in the electronic titles search. Currently only records with portfolios are found. Records with no inventory at all should only appear in the all titles search.

   Save Submitting...

8. Ability to select records to release from MD editor

   86 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   2 comments  ·  Alma » Metadata Management  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating
   Anonymous supported this idea  ·  Jan 30, 2025

9. replace "Do not show as Full Text available in CDI even if active in Alma" with a pair of show local / show CDI checkboxes

   100 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   5 comments  ·  Primo » Other  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating
   Anonymous supported this idea  ·  Jan 24, 2025

10. ORCID iD Integration in Info Card for Contributor Page in Alma

    203 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    3 comments  ·  Primo » Other  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating
    AdminAdina Marciano (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    Thank you for the suggested idea. We see its value and will consider it in the future. This development requires integration with third-party providers, and we will need to investigate the possibility of this development.

    Anonymous supported this idea  ·  Oct 3, 2024

11. Allow public display of the AcqWorkOrder type to be customized

    9 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Alma » Acquisitions - General  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating
    Anonymous supported this idea  ·  Apr 24, 2023

12. Multiple Quick-Cataloging Templates

    165 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    4 comments  ·  Alma » Resource Management - Physical  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Anonymous commented  ·  Oct 24, 2019  ·  Edit…  ·  Delete…

    This idea also asks for the quick cataloging template to be configurable.

    https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173-alma/suggestions/17237882-allow-configuration-of-quick-cataloguing-form-requ

    Save Submitting...

13. Analytics: Add item changed permanent location to events that are recorded (and timestamped) Physical Items Historical Events subject area

    27 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Alma » Analytics  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating
    Anonymous supported this idea  ·  Jul 25, 2019

14. Automatic dismissal of corrected authorities from the Authority Control Task List.

    116 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Alma » Metadata Management  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating
    Anonymous supported this idea  ·  Jul 3, 2017

15. Prompt message if you have not saved a record before releasing

    102 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    3 comments  ·  Alma » Metadata Management  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating
    AdminErez Shabo (Senior Product Owner, Ex Libris) responded

    Hello all,

    We are currently reviewing it to assess its technical feasibility and implications. We’ll follow up once we have more clarity.

    Anonymous supported this idea  ·  May 27, 2016