Skip to content
Innovative Idea Exchange

ILS - Polaris

JUMP TO ANOTHER FORUM

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback

97 results found

  1. In Leap, links to web-based public access catalogs are only available through bib records. It would be convenient if they can also be made accessible through item records.

    12 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  2. In our Retain/Delete table we remove certain subject headings with specific indicators. When we save a Bib record, the Remote Authority Control checks EVERY heading then removes the tags marked for deletion and checks the headings again.

    It'd be more efficient, time-wise, if Polaris deleted the tags first, then perform the Remote Authority Control.

    12 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  3. In cleaning up bibliographic data after years of laissez faire cataloguing practice, we have run into a consistent stumbling block that requires us to backtrack. Certain bytes, especially in the 007 and 008 fields appear to require consistency across them to properly read at an item level (we became aware of this when getting red toasts scanning items for a weeding record set, that appeared initially to be in the inclusion criteria).

    By way of example: If you input in 007 an 01 byte of 'd - Videodisc', than the 04 byte would have to be 'g' 'h' 's' or…

    11 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  4. We use only two call number schemes in item records, either “Dewey Decimal” or “Other”. I wonder if it is possible to hide the rest of the schemes from the dropdown menu in item records. This will reduce the chances of accidental selection of an incorrect scheme.

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  5. Have the Call Number (082 #a) drop into the Classification field in the Item Record when the item moves from On Order to Received.

    This function would most benefit staff who catalogue (or import full catalogue records) and then manage the Purchase Order process.

    The goal is to reduce the room for error when adding items.

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  6. Polaris client allows staff to populate a patron record set from an xlsx or csv on the local machine. Please enable this capability for item and bib record sets as well.

    9 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  7. Currently, when we need to edit a serial's status, it has to be done one at a time. We have multiple branches that all are scheduled to receive the same issue of a magazine. When the expected issue isn't published, due to a double or special issue instead, we have to edit each serial's status individually to "Never published". Adding serial specific fields where appropriate to bulk item edit would help this.

    8 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  8. Cataloging staff using the client have to resize the columns of the find tool results every time they search bibs and items. They also would like to be able to add and remove columns from their default searches. In LEAP, they can add and remove columns and LEAP remembers when they resize a column. This functionality in the client would save them steps.

    8 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  9. The volume field might seem straightforward, but when it's not standardized—or when anyone can input anything—it quickly becomes a source of frustration, especially with holds and sorting. Imagine a patron placing a hold on “Volume 2,” but one record says “v.2,” another says “Vol 2,” and another just “2”… chaos ensues.

    Making that field permission-based could go a long way in preserving data consistency and reducing hold errors. It puts a bit more control in the hands of cataloging staff or system administrators

    8 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  10. We have noticed an uptick in libraries circulating items on on-order records despite it violating consortia policy. We would like to see the text of on-order records (or even just specific fields) be in a different color to help provide a visual indicator of the record type.

    7 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  11. For SHRs and Authorities, if you have read-only access to those records and try to view them, you get an override pop-up. This is happening because it is attempting to open those records in Write mode. To VIEW the record, you have to hit cancel, which is confusing for staff.

    For Bib records, it does not work this way. For bib records, you can view them and then if you don't have permission to write or modify them, you get the pop-up when you attempt to save the record.

    In the item record if you have view only permissions, it…

    7 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  12. Currently Item Ad Hoc Bulk Change is only available on mouse right-click. Please add a toolbar button and/or a keystroke shortcut.

    7 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  13. Just as Polaris offers a workflow for the automatic deletion of patron records, introducing a similar feature for item records would be a highly valuable enhancement. The ability to automatically remove items based on defined criteria would streamline operations significantly. Currently, the manual process—such as creating a Record Set and performing bulk deletions—is repetitive and time-consuming. Automating this task would not only improve efficiency but also reduce the administrative burden on staff.

    6 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  14. The ability to recover deleted Item Templates.

    6 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  15. Allow 775 subfield Z MARC to be searched when searching for ISBNs.

    6 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  16. Please update Label Manager to restrict the Content option of Author from including subfields 0 and 1 when printing. These are relatively new fields for linked data. We would like to retain the data without have to manually deleting it in Label Manager to print pocket labels. They are valid in MARC21 and should be retained to future-proof our records for if and when Polaris makes use of linked data.

    5 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  17. In playing around with Weeding-type record sets, we have noted the following: using the action "add from Item Record set" yields, as its error report output, a list of item-level control numbers.

    If you "add from file", the error report output is item barcodes - a way of searching for items that comes a bit more intuitively to our desk staff.

    It would save us a couple processing steps to avoid importing from files, so we would love to use the "add from item record set" feature - however, the control number output for problem items (those that are outside…

    3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
1 2 3 5 Next →
  • Don't see your idea?