Emily Blodget
My feedback
13 results found
-
63 votesEmily Blodget supported this idea ·
-
20 votesEmily Blodget supported this idea ·
-
61 votesEmily Blodget supported this idea ·
-
128 votesEmily Blodget supported this idea ·
-
303 votesEmily Blodget supported this idea ·
-
145 votesEmily Blodget supported this idea ·
-
250 votesEmily Blodget supported this idea ·
-
221 votes
We have added it to our plan. We will share more details as part of the design phase
An error occurred while saving the comment Emily Blodget supported this idea · -
207 votesEmily Blodget supported this idea ·
-
59 votesEmily Blodget supported this idea ·
-
62 votesEmily Blodget supported this idea ·
-
26 votesEmily Blodget supported this idea ·
-
20 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Emily Blodget commentedHaving a straightforward browse list of all call numbers in order makes it so much easier to assign new call numbers and be confident that I'm not duplicating existing ones. It makes a lot of other tasks easier too.
Emily Blodget supported this idea ·
Emelia, that's interesting that it doesn't sort DDC right, given what a common system it is. Alma doesn't sort the government document schemes we use right either.
I wonder if it would be possible to have a way to let users toggle between "sort cutters as whole numbers" and "sort cutters as decimals" to accommodate a variety of call number schemes? Or something like that.
And it would be helpful if it pulled from more than just the 852 so that records which should have one but lack it for whatever reason are included. It's frustrating when you know a record exists but it doesn't show up in the browse list, and you start wondering how many other records are missing because the system is designed assuming that every record in every library has perfect data. Aleph was better about including all results that should be in the list--I miss that!