François Renaville
My feedback
24 results found
-
74 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commentedThanks, Moshe. I found an old case where I can see that this had also been explored, but I don't remember all details.
However, I'm going to open a new case and ask to disable both ALLOW USERS SEARCH (for CIRCULATION_DESK_OPERATOR_LIMITED and REQUESTS_OPERATOR) and USER LIST VIEW (for CIRCULATION_DESK_OPERATOR_LIMITED) in our Sandbox. Thanks for your suggestion.
François Renaville shared this idea · -
51 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,
Heidi Whitehead
Rialto Product Manager
François Renaville shared this idea · -
177 votesFrançois Renaville supported this idea ·
-
108 votesFrançois Renaville supported this idea ·
-
40 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commentedThanks for the update, Manu! ;-)
François Renaville shared this idea · -
18 votesFrançois Renaville supported this idea ·
-
35 votesFrançois Renaville shared this idea ·
-
60 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commentedWhen 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 · -
72 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commentedWhen 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 · -
76 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commented+1
François Renaville supported this idea · -
118 votesFrançois Renaville shared this idea ·
-
21 votesFrançois Renaville shared this idea ·
-
135 votesFrançois Renaville supported this idea ·
-
282 votesFrançois Renaville shared this idea ·
-
53 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commentedI agree with Jessie. Completed purchase requests (rejected or approved) should ideally not be visible in the MyAccount. It does not make sense to display them while completed and canceled Resource Sharing or Hold requests are not. This is something that patrons are claiming about.
-
181 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commentedWe also have tens of thousands outdated user notes created on Aleph. Too many for a systematic manual cleaning!
I think that we would have never migrated all these user notes if Ex Libris implementation team would have told us that it was not possible to run batch deletion jobs on them... We would have cleaned our user records in Oracle before the final migration. :-(
François Renaville supported this idea · -
92 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commentedI agree with this suggestion.
I think it should not only be limited to the PO Line and invoice attachments, but to all attachments in general in Alma. I find it really odd for example that someone with a Circulation Desk Operator - Limited role can delete attachments from a User record tab.François Renaville supported this idea · -
61 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commentedAgreed!
We have been using the "Return Receipt Letter" since 2015. We were considering disabling this letter since all loan/return actions are stored in Alma and available to patrons in their MyAccount. Before disabling the letter, we decided however to run a survey and to ask our patrons about it and if they find it useful. 30% replied they would prefer not to receive such a letter anymore while 66% replied they like it and appreciate to receive a return confirmation by email. Since there is no opt-in/opt-out possibility for this letter, we have no real good option for our patrons.
Among the 30% who would prefer not to receive the "Return Receipt Letter", several pointed out that:
(1) they receive already many emails,
(2) this is overcommunication from the library,
(3) it is useless energy consumption.François Renaville supported this idea · -
35 votesFrançois Renaville supported this idea ·
-
60 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment François Renaville commentedSome configuration possibilities for the limitation of the length would indeed be great!
@Moshe: Even without the 'User List View' privilege, the users search option remains available (tested on the Circ Desk Ope Limited in our Sandbox). I suspect there might be another privilege in conflict. We have a case about this. Thanks.