조재완
My feedback
20 results found
-
10 votes
-
40 votes
Thank you for your suggestion. The Rialto team is reviewing this idea to determine how it might fit into our future plans. We cannot provide a timeline for these ideas, but be sure to check back often and vote for the ideas you support to receive status and comment updates.
Best,
Amy Copeland
Senior Product Manager
-
53 votes
-
93 votes
-
244 votes
-
320 votes
-
425 votes
Thank you for the suggested idea.
After reading it carefully, I understand that the main pain point here is the removal/fix of items already received.
To be more specific, the description of already received items should be updated to reflect the new pattern.
- Is this understanding correct?
- How often such change happens?
- Can you please add examples of the existing description and the needed update?
- Can the 'Update items using Excel load' CloudApp be utilized for fixing the description? see https://developers.exlibrisgroup.com/appcenter/item-updater-by-excel/
Thanks for the collaboration,
Tamar Fuches
Alma product
-
325 votes
-
805 votes
Thanks for the examples - we will review them and discuss our options.
Best,
Tamar
-
279 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…
-
102 votes
Dear colleagues,
Thank you for raising this idea.
This idea is related to another one - https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173/suggestions/48370850, which 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…
-
214 votes
-
178 votes
-
206 votes
-
449 votes
-
589 votes
-
154 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment -
89 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Very good idea!
-
7 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment This feature sounds useful! Adding "Assign to function" to the dropdown menu or a separate tab would make managing purchase requests much more efficient. Being able to filter by specific functions would make tasks much easier. If this feature is added, I think it will greatly improve team collaboration and task processing speed. I’m really looking forward to it! 😊
-
23 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Improvements are absolutely necessary.
I really want it desperately. Please make it!