Anonymous
My feedback
14 results found
-
21 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
237 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
67 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
86 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
40 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
41 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment
Anonymous
commented
Any field that is important enough to be included in the database should be fully accessible, that is, present for searching, for exporting, for Analytics, etc. It is not correct that each separate field needs to have an enhancement request before it is fully functional!
-
84 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
48 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
23 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
162 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
209 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment
Anonymous
commented
This request needs to be amended to include all relevant MARC fields, 600, 610, 611, 630, 650, and 651 second indicator 0. I assume this is an out of the box feature. Surely other libraries in other parts of the world might want other vocabularies as their default subject browse?
-
60 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
62 votes
Dana Moshkovits
responded
Clarification was provided regarding the functionality requested – which is not to delete portfolios but rather detaching portfolios from the collection and setting them as standalone portfolios.
Re-opening the idea.An error occurred while saving the comment
Anonymous
commented
Also appearing as NERS 2022 number 7768.
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
92 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
Any field that is worth including in the database should be fully functional, that is, you should be able to search it, make reports on it, export it, have it be included in Analytics.