Anonymous
My feedback
16 results found
-
12 votesAnonymous supported this idea ·
-
9 votesAnonymous supported this idea ·
-
46 votesAnonymous supported this idea ·
-
24 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous supported this idea · -
11 votesAnonymous supported this idea ·
-
52 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous commentedIt was possible to add portfolios to the database search in Primo BO but no longer when we switched to VE. We had to change a number of portfolios into local databases. In some cases this should have been done anyway (we emptied our "Miscellaneous ebooks/journals collections) but in others it was a nuissance.
Anonymous supported this idea · -
42 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous commentedThis would also be very useful to filter for Open Access resources.
Anonymous supported this idea · -
18 votesAnonymous supported this idea ·
-
74 votesAnonymous supported this idea ·
-
417 votesAnonymous supported this idea ·
-
266 votesAnonymous supported this idea ·
-
116 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous commentedI agree with this proposal, also for the Database Search. I understand that clicking on a link launches an advanced search in Primo (outside the Database Search and Journals AtoZ), but if users were directed to a new browser tab then I don't think it would be too confusing for them.
-
62 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous commentedI also just had a staff member ask about this. Seems self-evident and should be a simple fix. I hope this idea gets more visibility.
Anonymous supported this idea · -
67 votesAnonymous supported this idea ·
-
42 votesAnonymous supported this idea ·
An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous commentedThis is related to another idea, enabling the access model setting at the collection level. If I had to choose between the two I'd rather add this information at the collection level, as there would be no need to do batch updating if this information were inherited from the collection: https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173-alma/suggestions/43836699-collection-level-access-model-setting.
However, it would be useful to be able to batch updates as well, to retroactively update collections involving various access models (EBSCO and ProQuest for example). -
111 votesAnonymous supported this idea ·
I support this idea. This is also problematic for OA records. We also chose to display print records, as we tend to have more local fields in print records than the electronic records that generally come from the CZ. However, if the electronic version is OA and the record includes a 506 field, the OA logo doesn't appear on the dedupped record unless the user limits to e-only (which few do).