François Renaville
My feedback
42 results found
-
49 votes
François Renaville supported this idea ·
-
48 votes
François Renaville supported this idea ·
-
391 votes
François Renaville supported this idea ·
-
40 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville shared this idea ·
-
17 votes
François Renaville supported this idea ·
-
30 votes
François Renaville shared this idea ·
-
57 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commented
When we reported to the Library Mobile project implementation team that it was not always possible to go back to search results with Primo PI, we were replied the following:
"This is a known issue and can't be changed. The behaviour follows Android developer best practices for navigation hierarchy and the usage of hardware back button as a local back within the feature, and the application back as a feature back button."We still do think that the current behavior does NOT follow best practices from a UX perspective and that app users should not be forced to click on the History button to re-run their initial search to find their search results back... Primo PI should NOT provide less options and possibilities that using Primo in a browser in responsive mode.
François Renaville shared this idea ·
-
43 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commented
When we reported to the Library Mobile project implementation team that there was no Advanced Search option (with Primo PI) in portrait mode, we were replied the following:
"This is the expected behaviour. It is Primo VE's styling kicking in for the device display size/width. If you resize the web app, you will also see that the advanced search link does not display."
We still do think that Primo PI should NOT provide less options and possibilities that using Primo in a browser in responsive mode.François Renaville shared this idea ·
-
42 votes
François Renaville supported this idea ·
-
64 votes
François Renaville shared this idea ·
-
61 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commented
+1
François Renaville supported this idea ·
-
160 votes
François Renaville shared this idea ·
-
117 votes
François Renaville shared this idea ·
-
193 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commented
This would indeed be a nice enhancement!
François Renaville supported this idea ·
-
62 votes
François Renaville supported this idea ·
-
21 votes
François Renaville shared this idea ·
-
126 votes
François Renaville supported this idea ·
-
141 votes
Thank you for posting this suggestion, we are considering the option to add a Request Type Filter to help users filtering requests by type (ILL, Purchase, Digitzation, Request ,… )
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commented
Hi Nili,
Thanks for asking! We had a look at the new Request type filter in My Library Card (Primo February 2020 Release) that allows users to select one or more request types to filter requests based on the selected request types. We consider this as a nice new feature, but it does not meet our original expectations in my institution that came to create this idea.
An additional Status filter could maybe be interesting, but this would probably require an action from patrons who do not want to see completed/rejected/inactive requests. We would like to avoid patrons to systematically use such a filter to hide completed/rejected/inactive requests they don’t want to see. So, if a new Status filter could be (1) set by default to only display Active requests and (2) remain across sessions, that would be great.
Additionally, there could be other possibilities. For example:
(A) By providing the Purchase Request type and the Purchase Request status with specific IDs that libraries could use to hide by default any completed/rejected Purchase Request in My Library Card by using the Customization Package (CSS).
(B) By adding a new true/false setting in the Primo BO / Primo VE Discovery Configuration tables that would allow libraries to decide whether or not they want completed/rejected/inactive requests to be displayed in My Library Card.Generally speaking, we are a bit confused here to see that Purchase Requests are not processed in the same way as the other requests (Hold, Digitization, Booking) that are not visible anymore in My Library Card once they have been completed or canceled. If you add a new Status filter, does that mean that all completed and canceled requests will suddenly become visible for patrons in My Library Card?
I appreciate your efforts to find a lasting solution to the situation.
As always, any comment or suggestion from the community would be most welcome!
Regards,
François
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commented
Thanks for the update, Nili. A Request Type Filter may be a good option in several cases.
I would like however to draw your attention to the current inconsistency in the MyAccount: Completed or Canceled ILL, Digitzation or Hold Requests are NEVER displayed in the MyAccount, only *Active* ILL, Digitzation and Hold Requests are, while Purchase Requests are ALWAYS displayed, whatever their status (Active, Completed or Canceled).
(1) Do you plan to display in the future all Requests, whatever their Status? -> Also completed and canceled requests would be displayed.
(2) Do you plan to add also a Status Filter? For example only Active Requests (whatever their Type) would be displayed by default.
Kind regards,
Fr.
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commented
There is also the following idea:
Sort purchase requests in Primo, by newest
https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308176-primo/suggestions/34676683-sort-purchase-requests-in-primo-by-newest@Stacey: Thanks for your comment and the link. I don't understand why Primo is so important. Wouldn't your librarians be happy if their purchase requests would rather be visible in *Alma*?
I wish it would be possible to hide completed/rejected purchase requests with the Customization Package (it would make me happy), but we have not been successful in achieving that. Any hint?
François Renaville shared this idea ·
-
12 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commented
This feature would certainly interest our patrons!
François Renaville supported this idea ·
-
260 votes
François Renaville shared this idea ·
Thanks for the update, Manu! ;-)