Chris Jones
My feedback
52 results found
-
22 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
Agree, this is a real frustration for bulk handling of citations. Together with few fields in citation search/advanced search it makes management of lists and list items over time harder than it should be.
-
202 votes
We will add a field to the course record in Alma, reportable in Analytics, for the faculty/school. It could be used for reporting purposes but not for discovery purposes. In other words, you will be able to pull list usage by faculty/school, but end users will not be able to browse by faculty/school.
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
Hi, apologies for delay in commentiing - yes it would still very much be useful. I suppose there will be a few aspects to consider:
1. At the most basic, a category-type analytics field which allowed groups of depts to be associated with a custom category might work for many folks and give flexibility on dashboards for example, assuming Depts>Schools or Depts-Faculty type models.
2. However there will be 'ontological oddities'; some folks have more precise needs with (dept>school>Faculty) equivalents - not suggesting the Academic Institution Internal Structure Ontology (AIISO) is a good fit, but flags some of the known issues.
3. slightly slippery slope would be other course analytics people want to/could capture (more practically useful than hours for example!)- which would be useful for admin/level of study, mode of attendance (Distance learning, part-time, and am sure many other issues.
Would be with a survey or discussion to pick out workarounds people adopt now (searchable Ids and Section ID fields being used for 'structural' organisational information.
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
An update here would be useful (also admin may need to review/remove some spammy comments from last year)
-
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
It would be useful to understand more about how the LTI tool was registered in this instance, and what user/course ids are passed to work with. IF not supported by Field Normalization or custom ids in the LTI, would it perhaps need a reverse look up by user id of the courses they are associated with? If no course in Alma unsure how would work.
-
5 votesChris Jones
shared this idea
·
-
18 votesChris Jones
shared this idea
·
-
113 votes
We are reviewing this idea but we need more information. Please share some scenarios in which a user would export reading lists in bulk. Please include which users and in which situations. Thank you.
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
Is this a function specific to the front-end, or intended for Students/Instructors/Library staff? Was wondering whether the Reading List Bulk Update Job in Alma with the Export to PDF could also serve as a basis to bulk export, although makes more sense front end with multiple selections from Find lists/My Lists etc
-
0 votesChris Jones
shared this idea
·
-
169 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
Have to say this being delayed again is not a good sign at all. It has consistently been in NERS and multiple rounds of voting. Would be useful to have a substantive update on this.
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
Hi,
I see from the Alma Roadmap highlights:
https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/@api/deki/files/74878/Alma_Roadmap_July_2019.pdf?revision=1That what appears to be the NERS 4025 outline is covered on p.69
"Multiple Item Recall
• Library will be able to implement more flexible recall policy options
• It will be possible to set a recall policy to apply the shortened due date to any
item or to a configurable percentage of copies that is in a request queue."Due 1st half of 2020
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
Hi,
Has there been any further progress on this issue?
Thanks!
-
273 votes
Hi,
Of course ! We will add a job that will be able to run on a set of user records and purge them, using standard validations (such as no existing loans, fees).
Thanks !
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
Hi,
Wondered if we could chase this for an indicative quarterly/half year release plan. It would make auditability (and use of Analytics in set creation) much more manageable than the current limited purge criteria, and also maybe benefit job size if that helps address comments on the number of records/length of job run concerned.
-
24 votes
Thank you for this idea!
We are currently working on a new version of the Alma Mobile app and will be adding iOS support for Codabar barcodes within the next year.
Mike Dicus
Product Manager-Alma MobileAn error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
similarly if there is any work on symbologies in use, could Telepen be included?
-
20 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
Is there any developer scope for a Cloud app which might assist with this at all?
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
Hi, this Idea describes a problem common to many institutions. Even if it is not a frequent event, when it does occur it is highly inconvenient to library staff and can frustrate the provision of efficient customer service to patrons. The manual re-issuing from one account to another (especially if over 20 loans/a single page etc) provides opportunities for errors to creep in, so it would be a very beneficial addition to the Fulfillment options to staff in the Manage Patron Services view. This is something we would hoped to have seen by now.
-
0 votesChris Jones
shared this idea
·
-
0 votesChris Jones
shared this idea
·
-
1 voteChris Jones
shared this idea
·
-
20 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
By way of further explanation, case 05327094 explains "When a request is canceled, it moves from one Oracle table (active requests) to another (Requests history). In any Oracle table, the creator is the one that 'created' the entry in this table, so when a request is moved to the request history table, the creator is not the user that created the request but the one that moved the request to the history table".
This is extremely unsatisfactory as it rewrites the history of the request in terms.
Completely support this idea. Lack of documentation around this (and after extensive work on Requests analytics when released in 2014) is not great. -
77 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
This is still an issue. It would be nice to be able to set some mandatory fields in the customization rather than having to set mandatory only at Book or Article level. We lose much time and cancel requests which lack basic information which would not be submitted in the first place is the custmization allowed making the form mandatory (admittedly this may need some qualification for Books versus Journal.
-
99 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
Anything to reduce the number of clicks here will help.
-
12 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
Agree, but possibly some flexibility needed here. There are occasionally situations where the only access is print (perhaps unlikely, but does happen), and we might still want to leave an article citation (although an instructor would not be able to handle this easily themselves).
Manual locate (August 21 release) perhaps provides an alternative here (as appears on citation whether located or not.
Disabling uresolver/detaching from repository and hiding links allow management of other aspects (except LibKey discovery downloads - remove DOI).
Does the manual locate just present the same problem for you in this situation? -
6 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
Is this another way of trying to define a hierarchy for Academic Departments? Am wondering how it differs from:
https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/395697-leganto/suggestions/19835518-academic-departments-add-field-for-faculty-schoo in practice - if need provision to group Academic Departments in additional ways. -
29 votes
Changing the status back from Accepted. Please continue to vote on the idea as your votes will help us prioritize the development. Thank you.
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Jones
commented
It would be good to know how many customers have avoided the "recalculate" option in the Course Loader at Rollover for the reason you give here - as to not applying the Course Reserves Automatic Statuses. We found recalculate to be unusable for the reason you give, opting for copy regardless.
These have sort of been delivered, BUT there is inconsistency in whether an advanced search for the object-type can allow a set of the same type to be created, compared to whether the Analytics output (dimension/column headers) alone will work for set creation. The Analytics CoP have worked on the latter, but there is still a gap for Search outputs allowing sets to be created, as Was noted below in the make it easier to create sets of courses idea - looking forward to
https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Leganto/Product_Materials/Product_Roadmap/Leganto_2024_-_25_Roadmap_Highlights/Library_Efficiency