Eric Johnston
My feedback
29 results found
-
19 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Eric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
7 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
2 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
56 votes
Thank you for all the feedback relating to the sections and the difficulties around defining them. We will be making some changes to these to make them more distinct. We will update as these become available.
Eric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
41 votes
With the changes to the list edit screens we are keen to review this and make it possible to undo some actions within the list.
Eric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
38 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
71 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
19 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
28 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
31 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
13 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Eric Johnston
commented
I think the second option of ignoring the 700 field when $e= donor or former owner would be preferable, as it would retain other , possibly useful entries.
Eric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
62 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
28 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Eric Johnston
commented
This would also be useful when a title is available in both print and electronic formats. In Primo the records may be merged to display together but only one LCN is captured when bookmarking so that it appears that we only have one format. Having both LCNs may prevent the need for academics to create separate bookmarks for print and electronic records.
-
24 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
19 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Eric Johnston
commented
We sometimes have situations where an academic will change the time period on a list rather than copying it. This can result in digitisation requests with the incorrect dates. In this scenario it would be useful to be able to change the request dates on the TADC request rather than withdrawing and re-requesting or replacing the request.
-
18 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Eric Johnston
commented
This would also be useful when doing a list review. Because Library Notes persist when a list is rolled over, it is currently impossible to tel whether a note is new and requires action for the current teaching period, or is old and has already been dealt with. A date added would help in making this assessment.
-
21 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
16 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
6 votesEric Johnston
supported this idea
·
-
99 votes
We have been reviewing this idea following on from the list edit work that has been taking place and would like to now explore this piece further.
This is an example of how an idea may be declined at a point in time but as we explore and develop new areas we do review all ideas past and present and consider them all.
An error occurred while saving the comment Eric Johnston
commented
We would find this extremely useful when adding sections to lists for copyright compliance. Often these are materials that we want to report to our licence authority but they are not needed for teaching or academics don't want these to be visible to students. The ability to add these to a section that could then be hidden would be an advantage.
Eric Johnston
supported this idea
·
This would be a huge time-saver when updating bookmark metadata!