veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be
My feedback
21 results found
-
411 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
-
8 votes
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
An error occurred while saving the comment veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be commented
I fully agree, really hope this can be realized.
-
4 votes
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be shared this idea ·
-
34 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be commented
I strongly support if the Idea applies to all public notes in the How to Get it section (not only for GES). Unluckily I only have 2 votes left, otherwise I would have given 3.
We are still on Primo Classic but are preparing to switch to Primo VE. We currently use html in public notes for several use cases; it's a big issue for us that the html is not interpreted in Primo VE. See also case 00957376veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
-
267 votes
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
-
101 votes
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be shared this idea ·
-
16 votes
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be shared this idea ·
-
144 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be commented
Although I previously supported the idea that it is better to have just one resource type “Book Review” than two different types mixed in the facet “Reviews”, I now agree with Katrine.
I got complaints of teaching staff that students can no longer filter on Review Articles. Their practice was to filter on “Peer reviewed” and “Reviews” in order to limit on Review articles. In certain disciplines, students that need to find information on a topic that is new for them, should start with a review article. Now, too many results are found.
A teacher let me know that she would now advice her students to start their search in other databases, where they can filter on Review articles.
That's a pitty.An error occurred while saving the comment veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be commented
I voted for this idea because I find it confusing and misleading hat two very different contents like review articles and book reviews are in the same facet.
If the issue can be solved by limiting the "reviews" facet by Book reviews only and and put the review articles in the facet "Articles", that's also fine with me. Maybe it's even better because there are already many resource types. Too many different resource types makes the facet less usable.veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
-
749 votes
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
-
104 votes
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be shared this idea ·
-
137 votes
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
-
166 votes
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
-
775 votes
Thanks for the examples - we will review them and discuss our options.
Best,
Tamar
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
-
60 votes
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
-
47 votes
Hello,
We are looking for ways to establish a consistent sustainable feed from Oasis.
Thanks,
Tamar Ganor
Content Product Manager
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
-
149 votes
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be shared this idea ·
-
37 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be commented
Indeed Laura, thanks for submitting this!
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
-
42 votes
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
-
60 votes
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be supported this idea ·
-
207 votes
veerle.kerstens@kuleuven.be shared this idea ·
I strongly support - wish I had more votes to spend !