Skip to content

Cindy Bowen

My feedback

34 results found

  1. 43 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Cindy Bowen commented  · 

    I'm also out of votes, but strongly support being able to enable this functionality at the view level and adjust what titles are displayed for each view.

  2. 6 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
  3. 43 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
  4. 22 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Cindy Bowen commented  · 

    If it helps anyone: We do bookings on a date basis only (i.e., the patron selects only the dates, not the times) to help address this issue. That plus a 1-hour preview period has the effect of requiring patrons to book at least one day in advance. From what I can tell, the preview period does two things: controls when the request appears in the pick-from-shelf list, and operates as a buffer between bookings. So using a longer preview period may also work if you still want to allow patrons to choose date-and-time...
    EDIT: The April 2024 release mucked this up for us; apparently how the Days resolution was working wasn't how it was intended to work, so they fixed it. We absolutely need this functionality now, because same-day requests were never what we wanted to happen.

  5. 48 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Cindy Bowen commented  · 

    This functionality is still sorely needed! I cannot vote on it because it's "Planned", but Dana's comment does not address the actual request of automatically populating the end date/time based on a selected start date/time. Adding this capability would be a huge win for my patrons.

  6. 36 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
  7. 48 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Alma » Other  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
  8. 113 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
  9. 84 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    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

    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
  10. 399 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    4 comments  ·  Primo » Primo VE  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Cindy Bowen commented  · 

    NERS 9000, open for voting now.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Cindy Bowen commented  · 

    The shortcomings of the OTB search rules are especially obvious and have a dire impact on search usefulness now that the 'Equals Exact Phrase' search operator has been introduced. For example, properly qualified LC Name Authority headings are impossible to search using the new operator because the OTB indexing uses only subfield $a for Author/Creator fields. For our cataloged titles, this has the ludicrous result of effectively only searching "Henry" from the name heading of King Henry VIII of England: $a Henry $b VIII, $c King of England, $d 1491-1547. If you search the full heading, the only results you receive are from the CDI, which misrepresents available resources.

    We are able to adjust search functionality for our hypertext linking definitions because of the ability to edit field normalization for that purpose, but there is currently no way to affect the OTB search more broadly. We need to be able to edit the OTB search rules to support local needs and allow our search results to better match user expectations.

    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
  11. 27 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Cindy Bowen commented  · 

    For what it's worth, it's feasible to use CSS to hide all the elements that you don't want patrons to modify. I asked Ex Libris for the coding to suppress the email and phone number portions (below), so I'm sure it's possible to do the same for the physical address...

    #prm_mypref\.label\.my_email {
    display:none;
    }

    label[translate="mypref.label.my_email"] {
    display: none;
    }

    input#prm_contact\.telephone_1 {
    display:none;
    }

    label[translate="contact.telephone_1"] {
    display: none;
    }

  12. 14 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Cindy Bowen shared this idea  · 
  13. 88 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Cindy Bowen commented  · 

    "What is needed is some mechanism for bookings to expire automatically once the exclusion period is reached."

    YES PLEASE. Our Booking Release Time setting is currently 12 hours (we book by day, not by hour), in the hopes that the overnight Handle Expired Booking Requests job would catch items not picked up on the first day of the (three-day) booking, but alas that's not how it works. This job only considers a booking "expired" if the entire booking period has elapsed without the item having been checked out to the requesting patron. And, of course, a once-daily job cannot ever properly address the scenario in the description above.

    In short, we need some automatic mechanism to expire the entire booking request once the Booking Release Time configured has elapsed. The only way to handle these right now is to manually cancel each 'released' request, and our staff time would be far better spent on other tasks.

  14. 66 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Cindy Bowen commented  · 

    Yes, please!! The Resource Requests Monitoring page is virtually useless for monitoring and managing Booking requests as the page currently operates. After selecting "Booking request" from the Request/Process Type facet, none of the rest of the facets are any help for trying to review what items have bookings coming up in the near future. Sure, we can find out what was requested recently, but we currently allow bookings to be placed up to 90 days in advance, so the Request Date means nothing to us.

    Instead, our staff have to export the list of Booking Requests and use Excel to sort the requests by start time. This is ridiculous and introduces the possibility of missing new requests that are placed for tomorrow, which is a problem when the list is being generated so items for upcoming bookings can be prepped. This functionality should already be possible in Alma and the fact that it isn't is extremely frustrating.

    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
  15. 38 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
  16. 338 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    When a loan due date is shortened due to patron expiry, Alma will retain and internal  an indication for that on the loan record. This way when the patron expiry is updated (shortened OR extended) the loan due date will be recalculated using the loan date (i.e. as if the recalculation is happening at loan time). 


    This way, the due date may be extended or shortened according to the new expiry date.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Cindy Bowen commented  · 

    Yes, is there any timeline on when this will be implemented? We've run into several patrons this semester where this functionality would have been very useful to have in place (the patron expiry was shortened, the loan due dates were not).

  17. 204 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    11 comments  ·  Primo » Primo VE  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
  18. 94 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
  19. 102 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
  20. 30 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Cindy Bowen commented  · 

    Yes, please! New order import profiles offer a checkbox for this ("Do not create electronic activation task"), so not having an equivalent option for GOBI API orders is especially vexing. Our workflow takes care of activating the resource without use of the activation task list, so the task list entries serve only to prevent the POL from automatically closing. This is a waste of staff time and effort to handle when Alma could easily automate the process if we could prevent the creation of the task list entries.

    Cindy Bowen supported this idea  · 
← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base