Patrons and staff are used to libraries listed in alphabetical order. Not having this consistency will lead to frustration.

We are part of a consortia and agree with the other comments posted for this idea. It would be helpful for patrons in all our libraries.

Not even sure why being able to customize facet order would be something a provider would lock down. I thought the whole point of using the new product was flexibility and customization. Patrons are obviously going to look for locations in alphabetical order and material types should be listed by most likely to be needed (books etc) rather than what there's the most stuff of. Let each consortium decide what works best for their system.

Having alphabetical order for library locations in the facets would be immensely helpful for our consortium. It would be helpful to have the ability to look at all of the formats and all of the locations when that facet is selected without having to go through multiple extra steps to find our medium-sized library in the consortium. Thank you.

Sorting facets by record count is obscuring important options for my patrons.
Thank you

We are a large consortia and our locations should be listed in alphabetical order to make searching easier and less confusing for all our patrons.

We are part of a large consortia and our locations should be listed in alphabetical order to provide consistency and to allow our library's patrons to find local items quickly.

Our small libraries are obscured in our catalog because their collection size consistently falls below the threshold of the facet display for location.

We would also like to organize location listings to be alphabetical and complete with all locations.

Yes, I would prefer to have the option to scroll through facet choices, when you select "All <facet type>" - whether it's location, concepts, etc. This would be in addition to the option to search (if you happen to know what words are going to help you with results, which is not easy when it comes to "concepts.").

This improvement would be very important to the patrons of our library, which is part of a large consortia. The Location Facet especially has to work properly in order for our patrons to find items in our collection.

It is not intuitive for users to type in a location to search for their library that is too far down the list to display. Please show all location results and put them in alphabetical order.

Ditto the other comments below. This would be hugely helpful for our consortia.

We are a large consortia, our locations should be listed in alphabetical order - it will be much easier for our patrons to find their location quickly. Thanks

As a small library in a large consortia, the facet of the home library listed first and then also within the list of all the other locations listed alphabetically so items may be found more easily, not ordered by who owns the most copies of an item. Also, please have the "apply" step removed and for all options to be listed when you expand the facet. That should be automatically applied when the particular facet is expanded when it lists options for selection. Thank you for your consideration.

Our consortia has both city and town libraries and the current set up makes it difficult for patrons to find local items in our small town collection. Our library collection is notably smaller than some and is not showing in the facet list.

We are a small library within a large consortia and need to see our location listed in alphabetical order. Thanks

We are a large consortia and our locations should be listed in alphabetical order to provide consistency. Thank you

We have received several comments from patrons and library staff that the facets should appear in alphabetical order. With more than 130 locations this is particularly important.

I am getting more and more comments about this from staff. It's very misleading when you use the facets, and have a link for "All persons" or "All concepts" and then get a window with just 24(?) and a search option. No way to scroll through all 346 persons that are supposedly related to the search. Pretty useless for the browser/person who has no idea what persons are in the full results set. You put in names and get no results. Very frustrating. Was this tested on regular users?

Our patrons would like the home library floated to the top of the location facet, but also for that facet to appear in alphabetical order. It is much easier to find a location quickly when it is in a consistent place, and people often use the catalog without logging in. There is usually no benefit to showing the library with the most items first when that facet is almost always used to filter results to a specific place connected to the patron. We would also like the Apply step removed and for all options to be listed when you expand the facet.

For example: For smaller libraries that don't show near the top of the Locations, it is too burdensome to open the facet, click "all locations," then still have to search for their library's name, press enter to run the search, check the box of the location, click confirm, then click apply to finally filter the results.