Simon Hunt
My feedback
13 results found
-
79 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Simon Hunt
supported this idea
·
-
163 votes
Thank you for this idea.
We are considering adding a tooltip to the "Starts with" search operator, rather than displaying it only for the "Title" field.
The tooltip will explain that this search option is available only for the "Title" field.
We believe that if we won't display this search operator at all for the other fields, the user will not know that this search option is possible, since the default search is usually done on the "Any" field.
Thanks
Simon Hunt
supported this idea
·
-
103 votesSimon Hunt
supported this idea
·
-
331 votes
Thank you posting this idea. Moving it to under review for further analysis.
Simon Hunt
supported this idea
·
-
16 votesSimon Hunt
supported this idea
·
-
163 votesSimon Hunt
supported this idea
·
-
40 votes
Dear all,
We are looking into adding the MMS ID for more sets. As the MMS ID identifies a bib record, including it for title sets makes sense - and we are planning to add this option to physical titles sets.
However, regarding physical items sets, the set entity is the item, while the MMS ID is part of the metadata of the bibliographic record - which limits our ability to use it when creating a set of physical items, as it is not an identifier of the item.
An error occurred while saving the comment Simon Hunt
commented
This would be an extremely useful addition!
Since OCLC number (or other 035 number), ISBN, etc. are not guaranteed to be unique identifiers in Alma, it is puzzling that Alma's own unique MMS ID is not always an option for creating itemized sets. It prevents us from reliably targeting specific records in Analytics and generating a 1:1 set based on the analysis.
Simon Hunt
supported this idea
·
-
188 votes
Thank you for this ideas exchange request.
For the purpose of clarification:
Alma uses (among others) two levels of faceting the bibliographic records: Material type and Resource type.Regarding the Material Type: There are seven different distinct bibliographic material types in Alma, and this corresponds to the seven different distinct bibliographic material types used by the MARC standard. These MARC standards are explained at https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bdintro.html under section “Scope of the Bibliographic Format”. Ex Libris will leave these distinct seven formats, and not add or subtract from them. This is because there are seven distinct formats in the MARC standard. For this reason we will not add another format or change the name of an existing format. Each bibliographic record has one bibliographic material type. The Material Type is considered “Music” if the LDR pos. 6 is one of the following: c d i j. This is explained in the Ex…
An error occurred while saving the comment Simon Hunt
commented
I agree that the Material Type index is largely worthless. However, the Resource Type index is much more granular, and is available as both an Alma search index and an attribute in the Bibliographic Details folder in Analytics. It has its quirks, but is much better for stats and other functions.
Here's the documentation on how the Resource Type is calculated:
(Cross-posted to Alma-L.)
-
55 votesSimon Hunt
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Simon Hunt
commented
Holdings records in suppressed locations should be automatically tagged as suppressed so these values are indicated in publishing profiles and Analytics. This way, suppression indicators would function the same whether they are being published to Primo or another source.
The presence of the "suppressed record" icon makes this even more confusing, since you can't tell if an individual record is tagged suppressed unless you open it in the MD Editor and look in the Tools menu (or run a report in Analytics).
-
43 votesSimon Hunt
supported this idea
·
-
13 votes
-
115 votesSimon Hunt
supported this idea
·
-
145 votesSimon Hunt
shared this idea
·
This would be very useful in the Physical Items SA! In addition to the Physical Items Historical Events SA, you can currently access these via the Requests SA. They are defined as:
"Request Details"."Current Process" = WorkOrderDepartment
"Request Type"."Request Type Description" = [In Process Type/Work Order Type" in Alma]
"Request Details"."Status (latest step)" = [Process Type Status/Work Order Status]
Porting those three fields to the Physical Items SA would be very helpful.