Manu Schwendener
My feedback
259 results found
-
82 votes
-
1 vote
An error occurred while saving the comment -
4 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
I agree that it is a strange construct.
Having separate labels to inform the patrons about what they are going to search in (instead of informing them _after_ the search about what they just did), would help - and could be done with relatively little effort?----
What I would like to see are some radio buttons (= mutually exclusive), visible on any level of the collection discovery
- search only this collection
- search this collection and its sub-collections
- search all collections----
Related: truncation not possible https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308176-primo/suggestions/45074038-searching-in-the-collection-discovery-exact-searc
-
256 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
Did not make it through round 2 of NERS 2023.
(15 complexity points, got 2929 votes).
Personally I consider this more of a bug fix than a feature request. We're talking about library catalogues here.
(Ideally the patrons should be able to decide if they want to export all call numbers or only the ones of a specific library.)
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
NERS 8256, round 2 open for voting now.
-
81 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
Related, parity issue for Primo VE: https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308176-primo/suggestions/41183158-include-call-number-for-physical-items-in-excel
-
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
+1
-
15 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
Related, for the Links section: https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308176-primo/suggestions/18761431-allow-customization-of-show-source-records-featu
-
14 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
Made it through round 2 of NERS 2023 (#8126) and should be possible by autumn 2024.
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
In my opinion we are (also) missing the possibility for a really compact display _within_ Primo.
-
6 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
Might be related to https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173-alma/suggestions/46832623-add-idref-for-linked-data-enrichment, in the Alma idea exchange (168 votes)
-
1 vote
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
Interesting.
-
101 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
Do you have any examples (URL) of wrong results after using the facet?
-
208 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
+1
-
Display related holdings for monographs only for the 773 $w relation and not for the 8xx $w relation
658 votesHi all,
We are currently reviewing this idea together with Alma.
We will update with any new information we have.
Best regards,
Yael.
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
NERS 8161, round 2 open for voting now.
Please vote if you can, this would fix sevaral problems.
As stated earlier:
As long as this is not fixed, Primo VE just looks broken/unreliable for our patrons.An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
NERS 8161, open for voting now.
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
This also leads to wrong information being shown to the patrons.
'Available at ... and other locations'.
No, only one library in our IZ has the printed version.
This teaches our patrons that they can't trust what they see in our catalog.
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
NERS 7857, open for voting now
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
Part of this is a bug fix, not a feature request:
When I turn off 'Display related holdings for monographs', the library facet should behave accordingly and NOT show libraries that stem from the 'related holdings' part.I even think that this is how the library facet should behave when 'Display related holdings for monographs' is turned on: the facets need to filter my short title list. I do not want to see a library facet because that library has OTHER titles.
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
> When filtering to a certain location via facets, you often get results from other locations too
As long as this is not fixed, Primo VE just looks broken/unreliable for our patrons:
I filter by a certain library, but the short title list includes titles that are NOT in that library.An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
There's an additional problem for consortia – we hope this idea will solve that as well:
– I'm in the search scope slot "This IZ"
– I filter with the facet 'Available in libraries'
– In the resulting list I see titles that are only available onlineThe reason for this is that some library in *another* IZ in our consortium has the title as print.
That just makes the facet 'Available in libraries' (which is supposed to limit to print) look broken/unreliable.
(SF00884291)
-
97 votes
This is currently not planned to be developed. We might evaluate it again in the future.
Currently we are removing the "Under review" status.
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
NERS 8258, round 2 open for voting now (2023)
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
> under review
This is great news, thank you, Yael.
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
NERS 8258, open for voting now (2023).
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
NERS 8258, open for voting now (2023).
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
NERS 7848, open for voting now
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
NERS 7848, open for voting now
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
combining two searches with OR could also be used as a workaround for https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308176-primo/suggestions/39837130-add-ability-to-select-multiple-options-on-advanced
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
See "Combining searches from search history into a new search", 70 votes.
URL: .../suggestions/31656826
(Direct link got deleted twice - as spam?)
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
Also show number of results before and after combining.
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
Also allow NOT and OR
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
+1
-
21 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
+1
-
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
+1
-
8 votes
-
3 votes
-
8 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
-
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Manu Schwendener commented
I agree.
The fastest workaround I see at the moment, in Primo VE:
- click on the label you want to edit
- click in the checkbox above the list of titles = select them all
- click on the 'edit' pencil icon in the banner -> New -> add your new label
(the new label should now include the same titles as the old one)
- click again on the 'edit' pencil icon
- delete the old label