By making everything editable from the user interface but with extra options for reviews, you would address the problem with to-ing and fro-ing between the two interfaces and having to check links that don't work in reviews but do work from the user interface, because the link resolver doesn't work and we would also see the list in the order in which it appears so editing it would be much easier and straightforward.

It would be great if, when reviewing list titles for each Talis list, we could see the review list titles in the same order as they appear on the list including the list sections if there.

For the purposes of prioritising reviews it would be very useful to have the ability to view and filter on list time periods in the Reviews screen alongside Stage, Status, Assigned, etc.

It would be very useful to be able to group book and chapters together while reviewing a list.

Being able to filter out articles and other non book-items would be great too!

It would be very useful from the perspective of someone supervising the reviews process to have:

a top-level review note that anyone who looks at a review can see

and/or

a note that can be sent to an assignee when a review is assigned to them

For multi-library systems, it would be useful if a list creator could indicate which library branch they want their print items on reserve. If they could be forced to select from a dropdown menu when creating their list (so part of the basic info of the list, such as title, hierarchy, and student numbers), this would be useful to staff carrying out the review and having to place physical items on reserve.

In View Edition move or add the Close button (for closing the View Editions box) at the top of the box to save scrolling down. As most of the time we are looking for new editions (which are at the top of the View Edition box), it would make sense to have the Close box button at the top rather than at the bottom. It would probably be better to add rather than move as it would be useful for those who have to scroll down to have it at the bottom too.

With several vendors now integrated into the Vendor section in the Review screen - and a lot of information in particular often coming from Askews & Holts - this section has now pushed the display of previous outcomes and comments for a given item off the bottom of the screen.

This is unhelpful as library staff usually need to see previous outcomes/comments before deciding whether further purchasing is required - so in effect this information is in the wrong order.

Could the vendor information please be moved below the outcomes/comments section?

It would be useful if you could filter to the items that have an alert for a new edition rather than just alerts in general. This would help to identify new editions without having to go through every item in the list.

We will have a number of different workflows for ordering of books needed for reading lists. In the case of those people who review reading lists but do not place orders it would be useful if they could add a review comment about the number of copies to be ordered, budget etc. and then have this included when they export the review. The CSV file could then be sent to the staff who do the ordering.

We can currently see changes made in the last few days, or search by list and then see changes, but the details are very sketchy. We need full detials of items that have been removed

The "View later edition" alert in the Reviews screen is currently very unreliable. It appears to be triggered by publication dates rather than edition statements and so picks up paperback reprints, e-book releases, etc - none of which are "new editions" in the academic sense of the word. Nine times out of ten when we look at it we find there isn't in fact a new edition, which is leading staff to ignore it. Is there any way it could be refined so that it only actually picks up 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc edition statements?

We'd benefit from option of being able to select multiple resources in a review (e.g. check box by each item/line) and set the review outcome. For example if we have bulk checked a number of weblinks would like to select all in one go and set review outcome rather than click though each item and do this individually, would be a good time saver for us.

It was also referred to in this idea dating back to 2012 when the system was much different. http://ideas.talis.com/forums/32805-talis-aspire-reading-lists/suggestions/3291742-set-review-outcome-via-drop-down

Thanks
Kristy

In the reviews screen the editor of an item is not detailed. This makes it more time consuming to review an item, particularly if there are several different items on a list that have the same title but editors rather than authors.
It would be very helpful if the records of items that have an editor display the same level of bibliographic data as those for items that have authors.