Skip to content

Stacey van Groll

← Have an idea for Ex Libris?

My feedback

164 results found

  1. Add 245 subfield c to Primo display

    93 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    10 comments  ·  Primo » User Interface  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Stacey van Groll commented  · 

    Hi,
    I agree that’s not ideal at all. Adding the 245 c to the Title is one of the first things we configured locally during our Primo BO Implementation. I see from the guide that it is indeed hard coded and I believe the only option for adding MARC fields in VE at the moment is to create a whole new local field, which is obviously only useful in practice for completely new MARC fields not already hard coded, and especially not Title which is such a key one. This seems like a pretty clear cut use case for VE sites to be able to customise display. Out of curiosity, did Ex Libris suggest this Idea Exchange submission, Lori?
    Cheers,
    Stacey van Groll, University of Queensland

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Stacey van Groll commented  · 

    Hi Lori, I added the 245 subfield c to Display in our Alma normalization rules in the Primo Back Office. If you are not Total Care, you should be able to do this also, otherwise I believe Total Care sites can open a SalesForce case to ask for it to be done.
    Cheers,
    Stacey van Groll
    University of Queensland

  2. View Primo as someone else / different types of users

    54 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    4 comments  ·  Primo » Administrative Tools  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Stacey van Groll commented  · 

    Good point, Ann, as it is a bit cumbersome to muck about with accounts. The ability to masquerade easily would be a nice one for staff to have. I wonder how that could be implemented just for staff though, as I wouldn't think it'd be something you'd want to make available for users. A snazzy concept for admins though, so I've added a vote :)
    Cheers, Stacey van Groll, University of Queensland

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Stacey van Groll commented  · 

    Sorry if I am not understanding this correctly, but can you not set up test accounts for this sort of display and functionality configuration testing?
    Or briefly change your account to the different user group? Obviously that’s predicated on your role privileges in Alma, but I would assume you would have this level given the nature of the question and the work?
    Cheers, Stacey van Groll, University of Queensland

  3. Manual Deleting of User (Patron) records and need for consistency in maintaining reportable data

    49 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    5 comments  ·  Alma » User Management  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Stacey van Groll commented  · 

    I agree that the policy set by the institution should be upheld regardless of the method for removing a user account.
    I also find it confusing that the 'Delete User Policy' is completely disregarded when you delete a user account manually directly in the account, but it is taken into account when running the Purge Users job. Why is it not called 'Purge User Policy'?
    Stacey van Groll, University of Queensland

  4. Set default encoding level for Export RIS in New UI

    77 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    10 comments  ·  Primo » User Interface  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Stacey van Groll commented  · 

    I've smoothed out our workflow a little as a workaround by changing 'Encoding' to 'UTF-8' in the Keeping This Item Tile Code Table. The little drop down arrow still appears with just UTF-8 listed, but hopefully users will just go straight to Download. This only works as a bit of a kludge though because we only have the one encoding option enabled, so more configuration options are still sorely needed.
    Cheers, Stacey van Groll
    Discovery and Access Coordinator

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Stacey van Groll commented  · 

    We'd also had feedback from users that the New UI display for Export RIS is confusing and takes many more clicks than is necessary.
    We would love to see this idea implemented, with more configuration options such as:
    * Allow encoding options to be relabelled, for example to change UTF-8 to EndNote UTF-8
    * Allow encoding options to be reordered, for example to move UTF-8 to the top of the list
    * If all bar one encoding option has been disabled, clicking on RIS should trigger the download. Clicks currently needed: 1st click on RIS, 2nd click on Encoding, 3rd click on UTF-8, and 4th click on Download. Or, if a user figures out that steps can be skipped: 1st click on RIS and 2nd click on Download
    Cheers, Stacey van Groll
    University of Queensland

1 2 … 5 6 7 9 Next →