Patricia Farnan
My feedback
170 results found
-
23 votes
Adi Alter
responded
Submitted by Ex Libris PM on behalf of our customers
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
24 votes
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
24 votes
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
30 votes
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
31 votes
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
200 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
260 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
Patricia Farnan
commented
"Can you not use the 'Change Physical items information' to bulk put all of the items of the location in a work order that is named 'Not Available' (making this text appear also in Primo) ? " - I don't see this as a feasible option when you have 83,000 records that are in offsite storage, as we do currently. We don't want to move 83k items into a work order.
-
23 votes
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment
Patricia Farnan
commented
Either having default settings as an option, or ensuring that chosen options remain 'sticky', would be appreciated updates.
-
91 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment
Patricia Farnan
commented
Good idea.
-
33 votes
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
29 votes
Changing the status back from Accepted. Please continue to vote on the idea as your votes will help us prioritize the development. Thank you.
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment
Patricia Farnan
commented
Just commenting again to say we really want this idea developed!
An error occurred while saving the comment
Patricia Farnan
commented
How did I not know this before?? I have had cases open for issues that are probably explained by this, and I don't recall ever having been told about the above in any of those cases.
-
8 votes
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
7 votes
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
4 votes
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
16 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
An error occurred while saving the comment
Patricia Farnan
commented
This would be very helpful for Australian libraries.
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
15 votes
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
6 votes
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
36 votes
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
3 votes
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
-
22 votes
Patricia Farnan
supported this idea
·
Agreed. We'd like to hide PRs for all print serials as well as electronic articles, etc.