It is possible to search in an itemized set and remove selected records.
In order to add more members you should use the following:
What is the missing functionality?
We are consider to enable two level of condition field: The first will be the existing one. the second will be configurable by the institution. Each institution will map its condition to the out of the box condition defined today.
It should enable both to keep a know mapping to condition by Alma and flexibility to the institution to have it own granularity.
Can you share your list of conditions you are using today?
Do you think you will need to group them together to a higher level or you always will want to see this granularity?
You also raise an issue of exporting the condition from the staff search.
Do you have other facets that are not exported? is this the only one?
I twill be helpful to illustrate the full workflow.
Today when searching for an item then relinking through the item editor a search screen come up and not the external search
Due to security needs we can't increase the timeout period.
It is possible to consider adding warning message enough time before expiration that will enable you to reset the timeout counting
Today it is possible to copy multiple fields in the Alma Metadata Editor.
All possible actions can be found in the online help:
"Copy (Ctrl+C) Copies the selected text - To copy multiple fields simultaneously, press Ctrl and select all the fields to be copied."
Currently Alma is working on mobile devices. We might look in the future according to the users community needs to widen the support
The menu issue you mentioned is planned to be handled in the coming release.
I suggest if you encounter additional issues to use the regular route for receiving support. For example the drop down.
These issues are related to the responsiveness ability and are across different type of devices.
Thank you for your feedback.
Alma can work on mobile. The recommended way is to use it horizontal position. The resolution you mentioned are relevant for PC.
First we would like to make sure we understand the use case.
See our attached document in which we reproduce the workflow we believe you describe .
Is you main issue that when a record is open in the metadata editor with several 5XX , 6XX or 7XX fields they must be in numerical order so that a cataloger can quickly find specific fields?
If this is not the case then where exactly does it bother you that the fields within each 5XX , 6XX or 7XX group are not in numerical order?
Can you provide screen shots illustrating the outcome?
Can you illustrate the desire result? It will help to better understand the improvement you are looking for.