Christian
My feedback
46 results found
-
35 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment An error occurred while saving the comment Christian
commented
Dear Line,
we had a case in this matter. Here is the answer and the improvement with the Alma November 2025 release:
"Based on the product team's analysis and recommendation, this behavior is expected: when a sliding panel is open, the persistent menu's icons are not displayed. There are two reasons for that: the user is focused on the specific task, and we also wanted to avoid opening menu panels above the sliding panel, which would look disorderly and unclear.
(...)
In addition, I would like to suggest using the "View in full page" option of the sliding panel. It was developed to assist with using the persistent panel icons when the sliding panel is open. When this option is selected, the sliding panel is extended to full view, and the icons are displayed again."Kind regards,
Christian. -
107 votesChristian
supported this idea
·
-
71 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Christian
commented
Yes, we also miss this SFX feature!
We offer links to "Electronic Journals Library (EZB)" and "German Union Catalogue of Serials (ZDB)". Here, too, it would be nice if the link is only displayed if the ISSN/E-ISSN actually finds hits in the target system (as we have activated many journals from international CZ collections that are not necessarily also available in German-speaking countries).Christian
supported this idea
·
-
165 votes
Dear all,
Thank you for sharing this idea.
I have read it carefully, and would like to make sure that I understand it:
Current situation:
There are several processes in PO line workflow which add automatic internal notes, for example:
- Renewal ("PO Line has been renewed automatically on…")
- Moving PO line out of PO (""Line was removed from Order ...")
- other.
Desired outcome:
Have a configurable option to disable these notes from being created. Each of these processes is/will be saved in the PO line history.
Please let me know if this understanding is correct.
Thanks,
Zohar Shemesh
Alma product team
Christian
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Christian
commented
The notes-tab also stores other "notes" that do not belong here, e.g. "Line was removed from Order PO-123456"
-
51 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Christian
commented
This missing functionality is very importent to us.
There is an option "Catalog Set" but you don't always want to push all set members to the MDE.
Thanks!Christian
supported this idea
·
-
146 votesChristian
supported this idea
·
-
266 votes
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…
An error occurred while saving the comment Christian
commented
Just to be reminded:
The NERS voting winner from 2021: ID #7177 ... Add option to configure Process Types for Unavailable Physical Items, without creation of requestsHowever, the implementation did not meet the specifications. That's why there are always new attempts to get a usable solution ...
-
14 votes
AdminTamar Ganor
(Admin, Ex Libris)
responded
Hello,
This idea has been closed by mistake, I apologize for the inconvenience.
It will be reviewed and addressed according to the regular workflow of content requests.
My sincere apologies.
Kind regards,
Tamar Ganor
Content Product Manager
Christian
supported this idea
·
-
58 votesAdminTamar Ganor
(Admin, Ex Libris)
responded
Hello,
This idea has been closed by mistake, I apologize for the inconvenience.
It will be reviewed and addressed according to the regular workflow of content requests.
My sincere apologies.
Kind regards,
Tamar Ganor
Content Product Manager
Christian
supported this idea
·
-
79 votes
-
2 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Christian
commented
Hi,
you can set parameters like "User group" for "Booking" fulfillment unit rules or have i misunderstood this idea?
Christian. -
23 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Christian
commented
In the new layout of the PO Line Task List receiving is possible directly within the PO Line.
1. Open the PO Line in "Edit" mode
2. Go to "Ordered items" section
3. Click the ellipsis menu ("...") and choose "Receive" -
34 votesChristian
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Christian
commented
A note about the CSS work-a-round:
When you open the "full view" of a record the HTML code for this pages looks like:
<body class="md-dialog-is-showing" ...>
<primo-explore>
<prm-report-problem>
Due to a CSS directive the "Feedback" dialog is displayes.However, when you reload such a "full view" page, the HMTL codes changes to:
<body>
<primo-explore>
<prm-report-problem>
Now the class "md-dialog-is-showing" and the CSS directive does not work anymore and the "Give us Feedback" section is not displayed.
The work-a-round does not work in this case.Please provide us a solution via the Primo backend (Primo BO) where we can define on which pages in Primo the "Feedback" dialog should be displayed.
Thank you in advance!An error occurred while saving the comment Christian
commented
It is the same with us, also we have only one option active ('Report a broken link'), because we currently use another tool for general user requests. So the feedback option only makes sense in the full display, but Ex Libris support told us that this configuration possibility is not planned for the near future.
Therefore, currently we control the display resp. non-display via CSS:/* Generally do not show the 'Feedback tool' ... */
prm-report-problem {
visibility: hidden;
}
/* ... but show it only on the Full Display screen (desktop view) ... */
body.md-dialog-is-showing prm-report-problem,
prm-full-view-page prm-report-problem {
visibility: visible;
}
/* ... and also on mobile devices (not only in 'landscape mode') ... */
body.md-dialog-is-showing prm-report-problem div.report-container button#reportProblem,
prm-full-view-page prm-full-view-page prm-report-problem {
display: block;
}
/* ... but do not show it in top menu ('...' menu) */
body.md-dialog-is-showing primo-explore.background-dark prm-report-problem {
visibility: hidden;
}
div button.report-problem-menu-mobile {
display: none;
} -
79 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Christian
commented
Addendum:
The idea made it to the 2nd round of NERS 2023 voting, but then did not receive enough votes to be implemented.Attached the implementation plans discussed with Ex Libris (8212-solution with images.docx) and two notes:
(1) Side effect: Have all identifiers on the PO line ("Preferred" and "Proposed Identifiers") be searchable in the Receiving workbench.
(2) Additional information for an identifier like (hardcover : alk. paper):
Our colleagues would be pleased if this information could be printed on the order letters. Correctly this information is stored in subfield $c. Sometimes it is stored in subfield $a but this is not common practice.https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd020.html
020 - International Standard Book Number (R)
$a - International Standard Book Number (NR)
$c - Terms of availability (NR)
$q - Qualifying information (R)https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd024.html
024 - Other Standard Identifier (R)
$a - Standard number or code (NR)
$c - Terms of availability (NR)
$q - Qualifying information (R)https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd028.html
028 - Publisher or Distributor Number (R)
$a - Publisher or distributor number (NR)
$b - Source (NR)
$q - Qualifying information (R)Ideally the content of subfield $c and $q will be stored in the XML field <type> under the node <meta_data_values>.
And if subfield $a contains not only the identifier, Ex Libris "splits" the content:
- identifier ... goes to <identifier>
- and the rest ... goes to <type>Christian
shared this idea
·
-
60 votesChristian
shared this idea
·
-
31 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Christian
commented
Note: this is not only a Primo VE issue. It is also relevant for the 'classic' Primo UI.
Christian
supported this idea
·
-
38 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Christian
commented
See also:
Set continuing orders not to claim
https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173-alma/suggestions/46288810-set-continuing-orders-not-to-claim
Automated order claiming
https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173-alma/suggestions/32510674-automated-order-claimingChristian
shared this idea
·
-
28 votesChristian
shared this idea
·
-
55 votesChristian
supported this idea
·
-
32 votesChristian
shared this idea
·
I have just requested in the case that the Product Managment joins the discussion on idea|exchange. Let's see ...