Quite often a reading list will feature several instances of the same book, but with different chapters to be read in different weeks. Usually in this case the book is bookmarked once and this is then dragged and dropped into each part of the list, then each instance is edited to 'Has Part - Chapter' and the appropriate details filled in.

When saving this or making any future edits, we get the prompt 'You have added this bookmark in multiple places - in total it appears X times on X list(s)' ... Do you want the changes you have made to affect all X occurrences, or just this occurrence?'

Would it be possible to turn this prompt off when the resource we are formatting is/has a chapter? Several members of my team have reported that it is too easy to accidentally click 'change all occurrences' which then formats all bookmarks as the same chapter and loses the detail of what we actually wanted in each week. Updating all instances is a very useful tool for articles and books but not so much for chapters.

When adding structure to sometimes lengthy lists migrated from our previous system, tutors use the search function to find the item they wish to move to one of their sections. However, the 'cut' feature is then absent from the action menu meaning they cannot 'move' the item to the right place in the list; only 'copy' it via 'My Bookmarks'. This either means the original item is still floating in the unstructured portion of the list and has to be found again to be deleted, or the tutor has to remember to open the action menu a second time with the search filter still applied and select 'delete'.

I believe this is particularly problematic for items that have been digitised (we use the DCS integration) as diverting the item through the 'My Bookmarks' area and deleting the original entry breaks the linking and causes additional restorative work for our digitisation team.

The ability to search, cut then 'move' the item in one manoeuvre would also be more streamlined than the current options.

We would like to see a feature built into Talis Aspire that would enable the system to run an accessibility check on items as they were being added to a reading list to determine whether the destination platform (e.g. an eBook site or journals database) is compliant with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. If that were possible, we could train our list creators to choose accessible resources for their lists. Also, the existence of a tool like this would put some pressure on those resource providers whose platforms are not very accessible to make improvements, or else find their resources making fewer appearances on Aspire-powered reading lists.

Of course, third-party accessibility checkers are available and are used by a limited number of staff already, but an inbuilt tool could be rolled out much more widely because it would become an integral part of the list creation and editing process.