Page Comparison

a. You can no longer open the full citation by clicking on the title-I miss that. Slows my own processing of list down just a little bit.

b. Due date same gray as the rest of the citation information. Placement of the due date is fine, but lacks distinctive font or color.

c. I don't know if it is part of the update, but when you send the list to the library, it does not show up in Alma as having been requested for review. Need clarification on this one.

a. 

b. Lacks the urgency of the colorful due date texts in the current version of leganto. Visually, citation information is clear, but lacks distinction-particularly due date information.

c. "Initial Request for Review" helps priotize lists–important feature and impacts workflow.

b. overall, the proposed UI is visually neater, but not distinct

b. Totally agree about the need to click on "full details" for an expanded view. I added this myself before realizing it had already been added! – JP

c. Were you checking Alma Production or Alma SB? I just tested with GUT3 and it showed up as a RL assigned to me. – JP

a. Change the name of the default search parameter to match what it called in HOLLIS--Catalog & Articles–and change the second option to Library Catalog so that they are distinct from each other and more descriptive.

Not a UI difference, so will backburner this for later discussion.

At least the search parameter you choose remains through multiple searches in the same session, rather than reverting to the default for each new search like it does now. (The way to avoid that now is the highlight and delete the search term last used, rather than using the 'X' in the search box.)

a. Clarification of the purpose of this note field

When viewing a citation, you can add public and private notes. Students can see public notes. Private notes can be seen only by the user who wrote the note.

Private notes can only be added by list owners or students. Guests cannot add private notes.

a. I tested in my list and didn't see the private note in Alma SB either. – JP

Just seconding - I am curious about this as well! - HW 3/12

a. The toolbar at the top of the list (+Add, Manage Sections, Filter, Search) sometimes disappears after adding items. I have to close the tab and reopen the list to restore it.

a. It's annoying to have to close the tab and reopen the list in Leganto again, especially if I've already navigated away from the reading list page in Alma.

b. Minor inconvenience

Overall, I found the interface fairly easy to use. It's very similar to the current version of Leganto.

Issues seems resolved as of April

a. I was trying to move an item from one section to another,

b. When I selected "Move Item," I expected a window to open with moving options or a list of other sections to move the item to. 

c. When I select "Move Item," a blank window opens with no options. 

a

. This impacts my work experience, 

b. Minor inconvenience, 

2/27/2024

KY Update 4/10/2024

Comment/

Suggestion

a. I was trying to open a citation and realized that "More Options" and "Full Details" both open the "Links & availability" window. 

b. I expected these options to open different windows in the citation record.

Usability issue noted; combine with Caitlin's feedback on clicking on citation to open full details pane of citation (as in old UI)

a. I feel like getting rid of  "More Options" and "Full Details" and making the entire citation clickable to access the "Links & availability" window is easier and more intuitive. It's how the current UI works, and I think it's more user-friendly. 

As of now, clicking on the citation opens a drop-down that only displays the Due Date, Student Note, and Tags (doing this in student view does nothing), and I don't find this very useful. 

b. Minor inconvenience, 

Suggestion

a. when adding a student note, it just adds a little symbol to cursor over to view the note rather than the note actually showing

UI issue noted; we use this notes field to convey information to students all the time and it is problematic that it isn't visible at the top level 

Caitlin

Elwood

a. I was using the folder upload option.

b. the text of the section name covered the buttons needed to complete the upload

a. impacts user experience

We think this has been identified and resolved; could not reproduce

a. not technically wrong, but less commonly used in the US and might lead to confusion.

Confirmed it is the same as prod/old UI

I do not like Monday start calendars.

I did not notice this! In fact, I specifically chose "Monday to Sunday" dates for my sections but based purely on Monday's position as the 2nd day of the week (from my US background). Because of this, my sections are now Tuesday to Monday, which probably isn't a good thing... – JP

a. The full-on embrace of negative space in the new design has resulted in the places to click for editing or moving citations becoming TINY. Also, the options for Full Details, Share, and the action menu don't show unless you hover in the citation's rectangle. Makes sense functionally but what is the point?

UI issue noted: more options menu is static in old UI; hovering required in new UI over citation in order to see options

This design as opposed to the previous one is simply 'either/or' thinking and doesn't make anything better–just unfamiliar and, for now, harder to work with. There was no point to this at all, other than keeping the design staff at Ex Libris busy.

HW 3/12 - I agree, Ronnie. In general, some of the cosmetic changes feel like they are a little harder to work with, for no benefit.

a. Edits made to citations while in Instructor VIew don't show until flipping to Student View then back.

b. Student notes don't show under the title of the citation in Instructor View.

UI issue already noted in Ryan's example above

a. Aggravating quirk or actual bug?

b. Notes meant for students have to be visible to us and the instructors–what is the point of them not showing in list view?

Not sure if I am grasping the syntax of this spreadsheet completely, but I'll just keep throwing things into it.

a. I couldn't duplicate this issue, but I had already published my lists for students to see. – JP

a. I can't seem to get the HOLLIS URL to display for DRPs until I duplicate the link while editing.

b. When the link does display in student view, I get a login required message even though I am logged into Leganto. Maybe because I'm logged into SB and the link is for production (is it for production??

I think this may be a sandbox thing but requires further investigation

a. Duplicating the link shouldn't be necessary. It is time consuming, redundant, and not obviously needed and therefore easily forgotten.

b. Students can't access materials

a. View online doesn't bring you to the selected item (found via Search in Library)

a. Students can't access materials

a. Needing to click on "Full Details" to see more info about the citation is annoying. I would expect, at minimum, clicking on the title do the same thing, and possibly even clicking in the white space.

a. Just personally annoying, and potentially annoying to students.

a. creating a citation for a whole book scan via library search, then changing the content type to "digital reserve book"

b. metadata would be preserved and displayed when content type is changed

c. book cover image is removed from view when the content type is changed to 'digital reserve book'

a. book cover can be visually useful for user when available

b. minor inconvenience

metadata would ideally be preserved and display even when content type is changed; content type is frequently changed in GUT workflows (HW)

Revisit when we move to prod.

a. create note on item citation

b. this note would be visible in instructor view and student view

c. note is not fully visible in instructor view - just the note icon, and text itself is visible when hovering over icon. note fully visible in student view.

a. inconvenient when building or reviewing course page. we frequently utilize these notes. why not show this in instructor view?

b. moderately inconvenient

suggestion - have full note text displayed in instructor view as well (HW

)

Issue noted previously.

a. marking citations/items complete

b. I would expect it to be visually obvious what has and has not been marked as complete, and for this to be easy to review in the instructor review (as in the old UI)

c. "unpublished" indicator is very subtle, and disappears when marked complete. 

a. while this is in some ways less cluttered, it is much more difficult at a glance to confirm that all citations have been marked complete. this is a pretty major issue, because overlooking this will cause items to  not appear in student view.

b. major workflow issue

a. click the '...' menu on a note (student view)

b. given that there is a menu there, I would expect menu options

c. blank menu box

a. mostly confusion

b. minor inconvenience

a. used "add new note" function from add menu, including the  description field. then tried to edit the note.

b. expected to be able to edit the description field, which displayed upon creation

c. description field automatically clears upon editing, and entries to description field no longer display, or save.

a. not sure about the applications of this description field, but if the option is there it should be usable

a. using add menu > new item > manual entry to create a note (rather than the add note)

b. note is an available content type, I'd expect this to be a way to create a note

c. this takes you through the full manual entry process and you have the option to fill out all fields, but none will display (including description)

a. confusing given the option is there, and in the previous UI this was the process for creating a note (rather than a separate menu option)

b. unsure

a. paste text into the notes field of citation

b. I expect the formatting to be standard, or for any formatting that shows to be editable

c. pasted notes retain style, like font, that then cannot be edited

a. major inconvenience for all notes to need to be entered manually or be preformatted

b. major inconvenience

a. move section/rearrange section order

b. I would expect there to be a way to do this after a section is created, but couldn't find one

c. no option for this, or couldn't locate one

a. severely limits ability to edit page

b. major issue

the separate sections when creating a citation ("item details"; "item actions"; "links + availability") are unintuitive and clunky to move between compared to the old interface. useful and heavily utilized fields, like notes viewable to students (as opposed to private notes) are no longer located on the first tab

this majorly affects workflow, it is significantly less convenient and visible compared to equivalent old leganto view (pictured)

a. toggle filters by content type

b. I expected this to work on a toggle in the menu

c. you have to clear filters completely to select new filters

a. slows down workflow - sorting by content type is the most efficient way to quality check, and slower switching between content types adds up

b. moderate inconvenience

a. filter by section

b. I would expect an option for this in the filter menu

c. no more filter by sections option in filters (exists in old UI)

a. this is useful for quality checking large course pages, for example, when only checking weeks 6-10, this is a useful filter for efficiency

b. minor inconvenience

Comment/
Suggestion

Currently, we occasionally create an empty section at the top of a page to create a prominent access note (particularly around clearing cache/cookies for electronic resource access).

It would be great to have a feature where we

could have a higher level note - at section level, rather than item level

There is current functionality to add a note to a section.

There is also functionality to add notes globally to all lists (at the top).

Suggestion

The current UI displays the search filters prominently. The new UI does not. 

a. The "Filter" is option is small and easy to overlook, whereas it used to be prominent. 

b. Maybe at least having online options as an always showing filter would be useful.

Image Modified

Old UI

Bug

Adding book using ISBN option didn't attach it to a book in our catalog

a. The book I used was Emma. Its MMSID is 990027486430203941

b. Used ISBN 0393960145 and Add using DOI or ISBN option

c. It didn't attach the request to the book in our catalog even though the ISBN is part of the record.