Settings and activity
61 results found
-
75 votes
Phil Agnew
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment -
44 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Phil Agnew
commented
I would prefer a dedicated column for Shelf Location. I understand we could adjust our Location Hierarchy to include Shelf Location, but I find concatenating those values into a single column a bit muddy.
Phil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
12 votesPhil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
28 votesPhil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
25 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Phil Agnew
commented
Hey, Gabrielle!
That's a big part of it, but it's also an attempt at streamlining the "Missing" process. Typically, circulation staff (who are the ones who notice when items are missing) open Item Records on the Circulation tab, even if they do have access to Modify Header, so it would reduce the number of clicks slightly. I suppose it would be even better if "Mark Item Missing" were added to the Actions menu on the Bib Record, so that staff could check a box next to their item and mark it "Missing" without needing to open the Item Record at all... or maybe even having a dedicated button for "Missing", since that action is likely to be performed by staff who don't regularly use the Actions menu for other functions. I took another screenshot of a Bib Record to demonstrate what I'm talking about there.
Phil Agnew
shared this idea
·
-
16 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Phil Agnew
commented
My immediate read on this was a "Next" button, which seems like a nice idea, but I realized there probably needs to be a way to indicate/determine which item would be "Next" on the record given your current selection. So instead, I think maybe a dynamic dropdown selection that includes the a concatenated string of a few key identifiers like Placement Branch, Call Number, and Barcode would be better suited for the task? This could, potentially, get pretty unwieldy though for Bibs with many items, so I'm not sure which would really be the "right" answer... Anyway, those are just a couple thoughts on what the navigation might look like.
Phil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
8 votesPhil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
15 votesPhil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
6 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Phil Agnew
commented
I can remember other systems using tag data containing image URLs to display custom cover art for bibliographic records. I'm not going to advocate we play whack-a-mole with every DVD that doesn't have cover art available in Syndetics, but I can understand the impulse to want to fix "the big ones". Furthermore, it's sometimes useful to provide links to images for "Things" that a library might circulate like laptops, activity kits, musical instruments, etc. and this would make that possible as well.
Phil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
16 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Phil Agnew
commented
I have a feeling we're talking specifically about the LDR... I won't pretend to know everything about the database, but I did A LOT of digging to see if I could get LDR data to surface in a report... it seems like the data exists in the database primarily as the component parts for the editable positions, which is probably why the field tag can't be edited directly. It stands to reason that the string must exist SOMEWHERE (otherwise we wouldn't see non-configurable data like the record length), but it doesn't appear to be a part of the normal BibliographicSubfields data... I know that all probably sounds inconsequential to this Idea, but if this development would make it easier to surface LDR data as a string in database queries, all the better!
Phil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
19 votesPhil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
16 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Phil Agnew
commented
This probably should have been deployed with the addition of the feature in Polaris, but I can understand the disconnect, since Vega/LX Starter is designed to support other ILS like Sierra.
Phil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
14 votesPhil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
32 votesPhil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
15 votesPhil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
19 votesPhil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
32 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Phil Agnew
commented
Honestly, we went live with Dated Notes, so I didn't even realize the merged patron data was being stored in a field that we had suppressed from view... I would still say the merged account logging is lacking (why do notes only include library card number when the Delete Patron transaction only logs PatronID?), but at the very least, these notes should be entered as Dated Notes as a configuration option. I might go even further to say that ANY system generated note should be optionally (only because some people aren't using Dated Notes) entered as a Dated Note. They already include timestamps on them, so it's like they were practically engineered for this application.
Phil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
17 votesPhil Agnew
supported this idea
·
-
10 votesPhil Agnew
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Phil Agnew
commented
Is this really not available in Leap? I haven't really looked into the PDF417 configuration much, but I didn't realize it was only supported by the desktop client... I guess Leap probably just needs a separate "Get Data From Barcode" button on the Registration workform that prepares it to receive the segmented/delimited data from the barcode reader... This is a feature I've always wanted to try implementing, so I'm a little disappointed to hear it isn't supported in Leap...
-
15 votesPhil Agnew
supported this idea
·
First, let me say I think being able to customize rules for roll-ups would be great, but I think this runs deeper than that. Not only do I think many people could struggle to develop their own rules to cover all of the potential variations for different formats and metadata sources, but sometimes the desired grouping just isn't facilitated by MARC data alone (usually due to some niche circumstances).
I would propose, to the dismay of any product developers, that a dedicated roll-up ID should be calculated on the ILS side (using customizable rules) that could be surfaced and edited manually, as needed. Again, custom rules are great, but I think there are a lot of libraries out there that would also like a way to roll-up their 4K Ultra HD edition of "Star Wars: Episode IV: A New Hope" with their vintage Laserdisc edition of "Star Wars" without a bunch of bibliographic/configuration detective work. Additional matching would still need to occur in Vega to roll-up digital materials with physical ones, but they could be matched up with authorized title fields from any of the bibs using the same roll-up ID (or maybe a primary bib? We're getting dangerously close to just developing a light-weight Title Authority here...).
Anyway, I just think the issue extends deep into the ILS database (even a little into the MARC), not just Vega. Bibliographic records were never built with FRBR description in mind, so there's always going to be shortcomings in organization built exclusively around programmatic rules. I'm certain this would be a separate idea/development for each ILS, but I still feel like it's worth mentioning while we're thinking about things in Discover.