Anonymous
My feedback
31 results found
-
45 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
15 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment -
93 votes
Dear colleagues,
Thank you for raising this idea.
This idea is related to another one - https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173/suggestions/48370850, which was part of the CERV cycle in 2025, but did not make it to the final list.
During the analysis, 3 possible approaches were discussed, each has a different estimation and effort:
Option 1: New dedicated process type
- It will be possible to mark specific items as "unavailable", similarly to the way it is possible to mark them as "missing"
- Items marked as "unavailable" will be considered as "not in place"
- The new "unavailable" option will appear as a possible process type in all the places where there is a list of process types, including configuration options such as Fulfillment Unit Rules
Option 2: Mark a location as "unavailable"
- It will be possible to mark a location as "unavailable"
- All items in this location will be considered as "not in place"
- The…
An error occurred while saving the comment
Anonymous
commented
Please see also this idea: Enable us to display items in an "Unavailable" location type as Unavailable in Primo
https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173-alma/suggestions/48370850-enable-us-to-display-items-in-an-unavailable-loc -
105 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment
Anonymous
commented
It‘s the same situation in our library. Staff user of sublibraries have only rights for their own library. In case of standing orders we make notes in local MARC fields. But some colleagues forget to make a note or the notes are unfortunately not always up-to-date.
Anonymous
shared this idea
·
-
3 votes
-
71 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
51 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
17 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
266 votes
Dear colleagues,
Thank you for raising this idea.
This was part of the CERV cycle in 2025, but did not make it to the final list.
During the analysis, 3 possible approaches were discussed, each has a different estimation and effort:
Option 1: New dedicated process type
- It will be possible to mark specific items as "unavailable", similarly to the way it is possible to mark them as "missing"
- Items marked as "unavailable" will be considered as "not in place"
- The new "unavailable" option will appear as a possible process type in all the places where there is a list of process types, including configuration options such as Fulfillment Unit Rules
Option 2: Mark a location as "unavailable"
- It will be possible to mark a location as "unavailable"
- All items in this location will be considered as "not in place"
- The difference from option 1 is that when an item…
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
58 votes
AdminTamar Ganor
(Admin, Ex Libris)
responded
Hello,
This idea has been closed by mistake, I apologize for the inconvenience.
It will be reviewed and addressed according to the regular workflow of content requests.
My sincere apologies.
Kind regards,
Tamar Ganor
Content Product Manager
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
14 votes
AdminTamar Ganor
(Admin, Ex Libris)
responded
Hello,
This idea has been closed by mistake, I apologize for the inconvenience.
It will be reviewed and addressed according to the regular workflow of content requests.
My sincere apologies.
Kind regards,
Tamar Ganor
Content Product Manager
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
36 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment
Anonymous
commented
Please note: such a setting should not be adjustable for the entire institution, but also at sublibrary level (or location level). Thanks!
-
3 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
18 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
28 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
28 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment
Anonymous
commented
I can only agree with Katharina:
It should be possible to change the address-from due to conditions in the XSL template.Use case:
A large sublibrary has an acquisition department for monographs and one for serials.
For the "Conversion Letter" the address-from is taken from the Library configuration: Config > Library Details > Contact Information: Email Addresses ... Billing, Claim response, Order response, ShippingWe would like to be able to change the address-from due to vendor code:
<xsl:if test="starts-with(notification_data/receivers/receiver/user/user_name, 'ABC')">
<!-- use address-from someone@library.com -->
</xsl:if>Thank you in advance for discussing this with the Development team!
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
8 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
34 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
44 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
19 votes
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
There is a job called "Change Electronic Collection information" that allows you to enter or delete the public note.