...
| # | Topic | Status | Description/ use case | Date added | Provided by Name, Institution | Interested parties | Has been discussed in meeting: Link to agenda/ minutes | Action required | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ongoing Orders for serials: link between the POL and Inventory |
| At Chicago, for serial print resources, our current system connects the purchase order line to a suppressed dummy item record. This is associated with a holdings record where bound volumes reside. Print serials are received on the serials check-in record. Once a volume is complete, they are bound and an item for the volume is created on the same holdings record. In FOLIO, we don't have to create a dummy item record for print serials. The POL can generate an instance/holdings only.
| 2021 | Kristin Martin (Chicago) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | Credits |
| Could we discuss the topic of handling credits? We'd be interested in seeing an example of the recommended credit workflow. | 2/3/2021 | Julie Brannon, Virginia Martin (Duke) | Discussed in the 2021-04-30 meeting. People can enter as negative invoices. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | Order Status as Open after invoice is fully paid - encumbrance rolls over to next year |
| During FYRO UAT we set up some one-time orders and created invoices to fully pay those orders. We expected no encumbrances for those orders to roll over to the next year; however, encumbrances did roll over. We think it's because the orders were still in an "Open" status (even though they were fully paid) because they hadn't yet been received. We often pay invoices on orders for materials that we don't receive for many months after payment and we don't want the encumbrance to carry over to the next fiscal year since they were fully paid during the current year. These were the encumbrance rollover settings we used:
How should we handle this scenario? Would we need to change the PO Line receipt status to "Receipt Not Required"? Which leads to the question: What impact does the Receipt Status values have on the Order Status based on invoice payment status? | 2/9/21 | Julie Brannon, Virginia Martin (Duke) | Discussed in the 2021-02-12 meeting. For the order to close, it must be received and paid. You could uncheck the "re-encumber" box to prevent re-encumbrance. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | Finance App: Adding groups to Funds UI enhancement |
| At Duke, we're planning to use a large number of Finance Groups (approximately 80) and Funds (approximately 400) to take full advantage of the ability to summarize spending in various ways. Each of our 400+ funds will have 4-5 groups assigned. In places where we need to select a fund or group from a list, it becomes cumbersome to scroll to select. Here are two examples: 1) Transfer: The transfer popup window requires the user to scroll through all funds to select the appropriate "From" without a search capability.
2) When applying the groups to a fund in the create new/edit screen it is cumbersome to scroll through such a high volume of groups 4 or 5 times to assign all of the appropriate groups. For a future usability enhancement perhaps one of these approaches could be considered for instances where we need to select a fund or group from a list:
2. Or, better yet, display the full list of groups with checkboxes and allow the user to select the desired groups simultaneously, as seen in the Users app to apply permissions:
| 2/9/21 | Julie Brannon, Virginia Martin (Duke) | Discussed in the 2021-04-30 meeting. Future functionality can allow groups to be organized, and to select funds from the Group Interface, instead of only being able to assign Groups from the Fund interface. UXPROD-2562 describes functionality to categorize groups. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | Avoiding Receiving books |
| For those of you who do not plan to receive ebooks, if you create an order for an ebook, even if you do not create an item record in inventory, a piece is still created in Receiving to be received. Currently, this can be avoided by checking"Manually add pieces for receiving." We don't plan to use Receiving to "receive" ebooks, so we don't need the piece. We would like to discuss a way to avoid creating a Piece record or receiving option for non-physical objects. If we just ignore these pieces for e-resources, we are concerns that it will be a problem to have a lot of permanently unreceived pieces hanging around. The current work-around is not intuitive. Will using Receipt Status="Receipt Not Required" solve the issue? | 2/11/2021 | Kristin Martin | Discussed in 2021-02-12 meeting. POs will close once paid and received. If "Receipt Not Required" used, then PO will close when paid and not be impacted by receiving. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 6 | Purchase Orders editing |
| Could we cover what can be edited in the PO/POL while it is open versus needing to unopen/reopen the PO? And are there any implications for unopening/reopening a PO if there are payments attached? | 2/11/2021 | Kristin Martin | Discussed in the 2021-04-30 meeting. The acquisitions fields information shows which fields can be edited while a PO is in an open state. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 7 | Update on plans Acquisition Unit restrictions |
| We've noticed that we can add Acquisition Units to Ledgers/Funds/Budgets; however, there do not seem to be any restrictions based on those assignments. So, if a user is assigned to the Law Library acquisition unit, but not the Medical School Library acq unit, they can still exercise all of their user permissions on the Medical School Library Ledgers/Funds/Budgets. We don't see a JIRA for implementing such functionality in the future. It would be helpful to better understand what functionality is planned/underway/complete for Acquisition Units across FOLIO so that we can identify any gaps where a feature request might be needed. | 2/12/2021 | Julie Brannon | Discussed at the 2021-05-21 meeting. Some action items are inactive, but the options are not invisible. These are controlled by permissions. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 8 | Ongoing Orders |
| We're a little confused about some of the fields in the Order for ongoing subscriptions. Specifically, there is a review date field on the GUI when creating a new order, as seen below. The API schema defines that field as "Date when Order has to be reviewed". There is also a field called Renewal date which is defined as "The date this Ongoing PO's order lines were renewed." Should this field contain a past date when the subscription was last renewed or a future date of the next renewal?
Also confusing: once you save the order and view the order information the Review date field doesn't appear in the Ongoing order information section. Is this expected behavior?
| 2/18/2021 | Julie Brannon | Discussed at the 2021-05-21 meeting. There will be some changes where Review Date (for non-subscriptions) will start to display. Renewal Date will no longer be required if "subscription" is checked. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 9 | Order Material Type |
| At Duke we're currently working on order data migration and are concerned about UXPROD-2455 which would address the need for an order material type. In which release of FOLIO is that JIRA expected so that we can plan our data migration appropriately? We're also interested in knowing the expected release of | 2/18/2021 | Julie Brannon | Discussed at the 2021-05-21 meeting. Custom fields highly ranked in the Kiwi pointing exercise. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 10 | Allocation Between Funds |
| FOLIO allows an allocation of money from one fund to another which appears on the transaction log of both budgets with a type of "Allocation." There is also the "Transfer" action which does the same thing (moves money from one fund's current budget to another fund's current budget). Those transactions are listed on the log with a type of "Transfer." We're just curious if other institutions plan to use the "Allocate" action to move money between funds, and if so, why not use the Transfer action? It seems a little confusing to us to allow the user to choose a "From" fund for an allocation. Update from 5/14/21 RM SIG meeting discussion:
| 2/18/2021 | See 2021-05-14 meeting notes. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 11 | Finding POs by format/type |
| I was doing some searching for orders in our local system and wanted to find open orders for ebooks. I realized that this was not simple. The "one-time" versus "ongoing" is at the PO level, but the filter for "order format" is at the POL level. I didn't actually see a way to easily do this. I ended up filtering by fund code, since we separate out continuations from monographs.Is there a way to do this directly in FOLIO or does it require LDP? When people have multi-line POs, do they mix formats in the Order Line? | 2/22/2021 | Kristin Martin | See 2021-05-14 meeting notes and 2021-04-23 meeting notes. This would be part of an architecture redo to combine information from the PO and POL into a single display and search. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 12 | Vouchers - view list of vouchers in a batch |
| Some questions about managing vouchers in Settings/Invoices
Update from 5/14/21 RM SIG meeting discussion:
| 3/4/2021 | Julie Brannon | See 2021-05-14 meeting notes. Shared information about the voucher XML and the voucher section on the invoice. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 13 | Receiving Books workflow |
| Chicago is considering not using the receiving app to receive print monograph. We'd like to talk this through. Pros:
Cons:
| 5/13/2021 | Kristin Martin | See 2021-05-14 meeting notes. In general, the Receiving workflow will be what allows an On Order Item to move to In Process, so is recommended. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 14 | What about Cover Records? All the different kinds/for-purposes? To use/keep or no? – Example (1) for Cat Sep Serial Ongoing Orders |
| Cover Records are a term that can have different meanings to different people in different systems. They can also serve different purposes depending on the order type and formats of the things they are representing. So let's start with a specific type: Cover Records for so called cataloged separately ongoing (aka standing or continuation or serial) orders. Example: Yale Series of Younger Poets. In my current system, I have a SUPPRESSED Cover Record for the series that my Order is attached to, and I pay the invoices on the Order. I also record on the Order the Items as they arrive. The "Cover Record" is suppressed from public view, & for various reasons, related to our current system, it also has an item and holdings record. Additionally I catalog the individual items with their own BIB, Item, & Holdings records (CAT SEP), AND connect the Items to the Order and their relevant Invoice. Now in FOLIO: Can the Order (POL) take on the role of the Cover Record in this case? What are all the implications? Will I be able to link up my individually cataloged inventory items to the PO/POL? Can I Receive the items on the POLs? Do I create and add new POLs as I go? How will that work? | 5/14/2021 | Sara Colglazier | Discussed at the 10/29/2021 Acq SIG meeting. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 16 | POL Expected Date |
| Ongoing orders: When a piece is received using the receiving app will the "expected date" on a POL be updated to indicate when the next piece is expected? | 5/26/21 | No. Discussed at 6/11/21 meeting | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 17 | Voucher Export file |
| Is it possible to add data elements to the file generated by the batch export voucher process (see https://wiki.folio.org/x/zgQGAg)? We've noticed that the Invoice Date is not included in the file, and that is a data element expected by our AP system. There is a voucher date included, but those dates will not always be the same. | 6/10/21 | Julie Brannon | Discussed at 6/11/21 meeting. MODINVOICE-262 scheduled for ACQ Sprint 124 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 18 | Print Journal Routing Lists |
| The Duke Law library uses functionality in Aleph to manage lists to route print journal subscription issues to faculty and staff. Do other institutions do this and if so, would it be possible to add a JIRA so this could be considered for future development? This isn't a high priority request, but it is functionality that exists in our current system. GBV also using a similar function in their system. Is being used less and less just because many journals are available electronically. | 7/1/21 | Dennis Bridges Need to create JIRA for prioritization. This is a lower priority at the moment. Would need to be visible at point of receipt. Users generally want to print the list of people this would be routed to. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 19 | Orders app: "Export results to csv" Missing data elements |
| The Orders app "Export results to csv" output file is missing a few data elements from Search & Filter pane. Users would likely expect the export to include all search/filter data elements. At Duke, the only one on this list that we need currently is the suffix since we're using that data element to store information that we need to export with the record. Also, we noticed a typo on one of the record headers in the export file "Instrucitons to vendor"
| 7/13/21 | Julie Brannon | Resolved in Kiwi - thank you! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 20 | Finance: Display of Fund name on Budget details screen |
| Finance UI Enhancement Request: Select a fund, then select a budget for the fund. The Budget detail screen opens to a full window with the Budget name at the top. The Budget name is composed of the Fund code plus the fiscal year code (such as 'FY2022'). The Fund name isn't included on this screen and it would be very helpful to include it there, especially for libraries where the Fund code value isn't a close match to the Fund name It would especially help to have the Fund name viewable when using Actions such as Transfer or Allocate which are based on the Fund name. As seen here, the Budget name displays at the top, but the Transfer action is based on Fund name - it would help to see the Fund name in the "Budget information" section as visual confirmation for the user when using the Transfer or Allocation actions.
| 7/15/21 | We started to display Fund code in select lists. But it would also be helpful to display the Fund name on the budget screen. Nice to have and would improve the UI. Dennis Bridges | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 21 | Organizations: FTP credentials permissions |
| The FTP details section of the Organization record contains credentials for the ftp server. Could this group discuss the possibility of adding permission controls to display of the user name/password? Currently, any user with permission to view the Organization record can view these fields. To be consistent with the handling of credentials in the Interface section, it seems like this should be protected data through permissions.
As a reminder, these are the permissions available for Organization interface credentials:
| 9/23/2021 | Lindsey Lowry+1 from UA | Similar to interface credentials users should need a specific permission to view username and password. JIRA created
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 22 | Orders: Inconsistent terminology between filters, detail pane, and .csv export for "Date opened" |
| This topic came up while trying to figure out how to create a list of all orders for a fiscal year. It's confusing that FOLIO has a filter in the Orders app for "Date ordered" but the user can't see any data elements on the order detail pane labeled "Date ordered." Similarly, the csv extract file doesn't contain a "Date ordered." It looks like the "Approval date" is set when an order is opened (when Settings > Approvals ""Approval required" to open orders" is turned off). So, for any institutions operating without the approval step this could definitely cause confusion for anyone trying to determine when an order was opened. Would it be possible to discuss this and find consistent terminology between the filter, detail pane, and csv extract that will help users determine when something was ordered?
Update from 10/12/21 meeting: Dennis shared that the "Ordered date" now appears on the PO - It's not appearing in orders created and opened in the Juniper bugfest environment, so will it be in Kiwi?
| 9/27/21 | Julie Brannon | Note: after initial conversations the "Date ordered" field was added to the order view. "date ordered" only appears. Decision to update label to "Date opened" DONE | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 23 | Invoices: Voucher generation feedback |
| The voucher generation process is rather confusing - here is some feedback for discussion: 1) Institutions regularly run the voucher extract manually rather than setting up the daily/weekly schedule. Going to settings to run an operational process seems out of place since settings are generally static. We'll need to set up our users to have permissions in settings that may not be appropriate for their role. 2) The current setup allows the user to run manual export without entering any FTP credentials which is helpful for testing. Why does this workflow generate an error "Credentials for export configuration was not found." Could we find a way to make the interface more intuitive and support users who want to create a file without FTP credentials? 3) We need to preview the voucher file before it runs to confirm that the invoices are set up correctly prior to submission to the university AP system - we can then make any needed corrections before submitting to AP. Is there already a JIRA for this requirement? Or could this need be meet by adding a filter for batch group and an indicator of which invoices have not yet been included in a voucher export run? We can't rely on the LDP for this preview since we need real-time data. | 9/30/21 | Julie Brannon | Investigate approaches to allowing operational users to export vouchers without having access to settings. - page created at https://wiki.folio.org/x/g7W8B Allow for accurate filtering or the display of a voucher export preview - page created at https://wiki.folio.org/x/jLW8B Discussed 2022-02-25 Acquisitions Meeting notes and | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 24 | Invoices: Export to Accounting checkbox default value |
| Would it be possible to discuss design improvements for the "Export to accounting" checkbox? There are no templates available for Invoices to help guide users and this checkbox is not prominent, yet significant headaches are caused if it is overlooked. If a user forgets/overlooks this checkbox for invoices that need to be sent to an external AP system how do they fix that mistake? Once the invoice is paid it doesn't seem possible to edit the checkbox value to "on", so would we need to cancel that invoice and create a new one in order to create a voucher for export to AP? A preferred workflow could be to allow institutions to configure the default value of the "Export to accounting" checkbox in Settings > Invoices based on the Payment type since that typically drives whether an invoice is sent to an AP system for payment processing or not. Example default settings below:
Note added 1/14/22: There is an "Export to accounting" checkbox in Organizations >Vendor information section. The setting of this flag determines the default value when an invoice is created for that vendor, so a workaround for libraries that are concerned about missing this flag during invoice creation would be to turn it on for all vendors. | 10/1/2021 | Julie Brannon | Allow user to configure which payment types trigger export to accounting by default - need to create feature Dennis Bridges Discussed 2022-02-25 Acquisitions Meeting notes | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 25 | Invoices: Can't search or filter by FOLIO invoice # |
| The Invoices app search and filter pane doesn't include a filter or keyword search of the system assigned "FOLIO invoice number." We're not sure why this system identifier exists since there is already a Vendor invoice number and a Voucher number. Since this "FOLIO invoice number " is a system identifier on an invoice record, it seems like this data element should be included in the search pane, or maybe it doesn't even need to exist? | 10/7/2021 | Julie Brannon | Group is in favor of deprecating the FOLIO invoice number and removing it from the UI. Currently, it isn't being used by libraries consistently. Replace FOLIO invoice number in POL info with Vendor invoice number.
Discussed: 2022-02-25 Acquisitions Meeting notes | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 26 | Invoices: Hide accordions in Invoice view where there is no content |
| When looking at the invoice detail pane we find it confusing that there are accordions for "Fund Distribution" and "Adjustments" that only seem to populate when an adjustment has been applied to the invoice header. Users see those accordion titles and would expect to see information from the invoice lines, so when no data is displayed (as will be the case for most invoices) it causes confusion.
Renaming these might help - if the name could better describe what the user should expect to see in these sections. Even better, only display accordions when there is data to display, as implemented in the ERM Licenses app:
| 10/8/2021 | Julie Brannon | Do not display empty accordions at this level because they are not required to successfully pay an invoice. Differentiate accordions by updating labels
Discussed 2022-02-25 Acquisitions Meeting notes | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 27 | Invoices: "Add" and "New" Invoice line button labels |
| The button labels to create new invoice lines are confusing. They are currently "Add" and "New", the meanings of which overlap (both actions create a new invoice line, both actions add an invoice line). In the Orders app, a similar button is labeled "Add PO line" which clearly describes the action. At Duke we aren't sure if we have any use cases for the "New" pathway (we would always want an order to describe the purchase), so we're not sure how to better name that action. Here are a few ideas:
| 10/8/2021 | Julie Brannon | This has been adjusted for the Lotus release and it seems the changes have resolved the issue. Discussed 2022-02-25 Acquisitions Meeting notes | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 28 | Invoices and Receiving: Display vendor code |
| 1) The Invoices app displays the vendor name in three locations (see the 3 red boxes below - this vendor's code is "5M"), but doesn't display the vendor code anywhere. This makes it very challenging for users to visually validate that the vendor assigned to the invoice record matches the vendor on the attached POL(s). At Duke, we maintain separate vendor records for each independent library and our users rely on the vendor code naming convention to provide a quick visual clue about which vendor is associated with an invoice. Proposal: Add vendor code to the invoice information section and ability to click through to vendor's Organization record or maybe change the Invoices results table column from Vendor name to Vendor code to be consistent with how the result list displays in the Orders app.
Also, the filter label is "Vendor name" (in the green box above) which is inconsistent with the Orders app filter label "Vendor." Since those filters trigger the same lookup (which isn't just by vendor name) they should have a consistent label, preferably "Vendor." 2) Similarly, the Receiving app is also missing vendor code - only vendor name is displayed. | 10/8/2021 | Julie Brannon | Where we display Name we should also display the Code. Users that work on invoices rely on codes as vendor names change. However, selector may rely on the names as they likely won't recognise the code. Also a label issue with the Filter. should be consistent with orders + receiving.story created
Discussed 2022-03-08 Acquisitions Meeting notes | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 29 | Invoices: Add a filter for fund code |
| Add a filter as in orders app to find all invoices for a specific fund code | 10/28/2021 | Martina Schildt | Need Story to be able to filter invoices by fund code as we do with POLs. Ideally this would includes expense classes as well - Dennis Bridges
Discussed 2022-03-08 meeting. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 30 | Organizations: Add "note" column to Contact People accordion |
| Our ERM staff at Duke have asked whether the Organization app Contact people "note" field could be added as a column on the detail pane. They don't need to see the phone info there (since contact is by email). The notes help them to identify which person in the Sales category, for instance, to contact for databases and stores other useful info about the contact. They'd prefer not to have extra clicks to open the full record for each contact to see that note, if possible.
| 11/3/2021 | Julie Brannon | Need story for adding notes filed as column at the end of contact person view MCL Dennis Bridges Discussed 2022-03-08 Acquisitions Meeting notes | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 31 | Organizations: Make URI/URL link clickable in the interfaces |
| When adding or assigning an interface to an Org app, the URI or URL provided needs to be clickable/open in a new tab from the top-level organizations record. This would allow for easier access to the interface when methodically pulling statistics at fiscal year close and cut down on copy/paste.
| 11/3/21 | Lindsey Lowry | This change will be part of the lotus release. see
Discussed 2022-03-08 Acquisitions Meeting notes | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 32 | Invoices: Lock total checkbox |
| Invoices: We'd expect the lock total checkbox to default as checked rather than unchecked. Would it be possible to make the default value configurable in Settings so that institutions can decide which approach works best for them?
| 11/15/2021 | Julie Brannon | Default value of lock total should be "True" as generally users input the total amount of the invoice first and proceed to fill in the lines after. Helpful to have the system check your work. If not needed it can always be unchecked. If possible would also be helpful to have this default be configurable. Dennis Bridges need to create story. Discussed 2022-03-08 Acquisitions Meeting notes | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 33 | Invoices: Add POL "Select order lines" - show all before save |
| Invoices app > Invoice lines > Add > Search by POL number, select the POL, repeat. We are glad that the "Select order lines" process allows us to search for and select multiple POLs before clicking "Save" and we see the total number selected at the bottom; however, we can't see the list of selected POLs before we save. The user is likely to search by POL number, not by vendor since there would be too many results to scroll through. As they search one-by-one for each POL and select each one, it would be helpful to see the list of POLs that they've already selected and have the opportunity to unselect any mistakes before clicking "Save." The current flow leaves the user feeling unsure since they can't see which lines they've selected already.
| 11/15/2021 | Julie Brannon | Need to explore possible design solutions Dennis Bridges to reach out to Kimie about design | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 34 | Link POL to related Agreement lines |
| Any given POL may be connected to one or multiple agreement lines. If so, Orders currently displays the related agreements on the POL view pane. As the ordered content is not represented by the agreements but the agreement lines, the agreement lines should be linked and displayed instead of the agreements. | 11/16/2021 | Martina Schildt | This was implemented for lotus see
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 35 | Order and Invoice: Link to vendor Organization record |
| Low-priority request: On the order and invoice could the vendor field be upgraded from static text of the vendor name to an active link so that the user can easily click through to view the full organization record for the vendor? This type of linking is very helpful in other fields on the order such as the Fund, Title, and Related invoices.
| 11/19/2021 | Need to create enhancement Dennis Bridges consider what to do in the header with previous story re displaying vendor code rather than name. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 36 | Invoices: Add adjustment - Release encumbrance defaults to "unchecked" |
| Invoices >Invoice lines > New: The default value for the "Release encumbrance" checkbox is unchecked on the create vendor invoice line screen (which is used when the user is not linking to an existing POL). Could we discuss reversing the default value to "checked" since this could trip up users who don't check it and then have dangling encumbrances. The original thinking for leaving it unchecked was to ensure that ongoing orders didn't get automatically closed by the system. Now that we have the "Ongoing" order payment status and no longer have that issue maybe we could revisit this to set to "checked."
| 11/23/21 | Julie Brannon | It is standing orders not subscriptions that should default to false because they often have multiple invoices. for subscriptions more often there is one invoice for the year. The default may not be as important than making clear what this toggle will do in documentation. We will have some additional discussion after libraries have had a chance to review. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 37 | on POL: re: Related invoices |
| I am confused by what is displayed in the Piece(s) field of the Related invoices for POLs. In my test example here, the pieces listed are not necessarily specific or related to the invoice/invoice line, but seeming just bucket-displaying all the pieces created related to the POL, which is not helpful. I would rather see specific Invoice LINE note info displayed, like: "Renewal. New subscription ; Invoicing period:20220101-20221231 (86-86)" in this case vendor provided and included in the EDI invoice, OR, something I manually enter like: 2022 Hathitrust Membership: Public Domain, versus, another Invoice line for: 2022 Hathitrust Membership: In-Copyright, each with their respective amounts, to help me understand what I just paid for.
|
| As piece information is actually no longer shown in this area it would be helpful to show subscription information in a column here. User may identify in more detail in this field what the sub is for. Also ideally the sub date start and end are shown in the related info. worth scrolling to have this information on hand. This should apply to related invoice information shown on the POL and on the Invoice line See Example in agreements of combined columns in MCL. This could be a way to decrease the width of some of our tables Need to create a story Dennis Bridges | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 38 | POL/inventory matching |
| At Chicago, we're continuing to struggle with identifier matches when creating POs. We want to be creating new instances in Inventory, but instead matches are occurring and the new item is being attached to the wrong instance record in Inventory. This is on our test system (running Juniper). We are getting matches when the publisher provides an ISBN in the 024 or a publisher/distributor number in the 028. This is really common for Harrassowitz with music scores. So a short, non-unique publisher number, like "8021" matches multiple records already in Inventory, and then FOLIO picks the first one it finds and attached the new holdings/item. These aren't even the same title, different format - these are two very distinct publications. If you want to see this in action, here's a short video: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MOnMnF7u-RKb0pmFy80wulCjIfBmnwJ8/view?usp=sharing. One interim solution is to remove any identifiers (which is kind of a bummer, since these can be useful to identifying the material). Lotus will bring the ability to turn off identifier matching. Orders will use all "Product identifier types". These match up to "Resource identifier types" in instance records
It would be good to discuss how we might want matching to work since the current process is way too broad. |
| Perhaps rather than increasing the detail of matching FOLIO could report on the matches that were made? Perhaps specific to source. ie. GOBI. Need to identify specific situations were the matching is failing in order to improve accuracy. Otherwise it might make more sense to focus on improving the visibility of incorrect matches. Dennis Bridges to add detail to Wiki page. https://wiki.folio.org/x/z__8B | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 39 | Organizations: Add field for contact person on contact information |
| Add a field for the mail address of a direct contact person to the cards in the accordion "contact information". If I need to contact an organization on e.g. shipments I rarely use general mail addresses but rather direct contact people.
Primary issue is understanding who to add as attention to when you are just sending a communication to an address. Address 1 and 2 are used for many things. Alternative: use the categories for contact people in the same way as for the general contatct information
|
| Martina Schildt | Need to create story for adding an "Attention to" field to the address field set. Free text would suffice Dennis Bridges to create JIRA for review | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 40 | Organizations: Add "Name" field on contact information |
| This is somewhat related to issue #39 above. When migrating our vendor address information from our current system we noticed that there isn't a data element on the contact information address for the "name." We've mapped the various address names to the alternate/alias name in FOLIO just to store them somewhere. Similar to #39 above, we need to store the first line of the address (the name) since it is usually more specific or slightly different than the organization name we store in FOLIO and isn't necessarily the same for shipments vs. payment vs. claims. | 12/16/21 | Julie Brannon , Duke | Multiple organizations had to be creative with migration because of the lack of fields for address info. The additional field for address details could be an "Attention" or "Department". It might be helpful to have an additional Address field and a separate name field. Dennis Bridges to create story | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 41 | Orders: Renewal date and Renewal interval - why required? |
| Orders: For ongoing orders, when the subscription checkbox is on, the Renewal date and Renewal interval are required - why? This topic was addressed as #8 on this list and discussed at the 2021-05-21 meeting with notes that these fields were being looked at and wouldn't be required in the future. We can't find the associated JIRA and wondered when that update is expected? | 1/4/22 | Julie Brannon , Duke | These requirements are being removed. the last story is
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 42 | Invoices: Create invoice line field label consistency |
| Invoices: If the user creates a New invoice line, the Create vendor invoice line screen opens (see screenshot below). In the "Add adjustment" section, The field label "Amount" seems inconsistent with other fields in FOLIO labeled "Value" that allow the user to toggle between % and $. Could we consider changing the "Amount" field label to "Value" to be consistent?
| 1/5/22 | Julie Brannon , Duke | JIRA was created for this update.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 43 | Invoices: "Pay immediately" flag |
| Would other institutions find it helpful to flag invoices that need special "pay immediately" handling by their AP system? At Duke, we sometimes need to process payment more quickly than the standard processing time and we need a way to communicate that in the voucher extract to alert AP staff. In our current system (Aleph), we use a defined string of text in a note field, but it would be preferable to have a distinct data element. This would essentially be a rush flag for invoices that need to be paid more quickly than the standard Net 30. It doesn't not specifically mean this needs to be paid in X number of days just that AP should not hold payment for any length of time. No use cases that the group could think of for partial "Immediate payment" | 1/6/22 | Julie Brannon , Duke | Dennis Bridges to create story to capture design and implementation detail. Suggestions is to use a simple flag on the invoice. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 44 | Orders: Add order POL Receipt date - why editable? |
| Orders > add PO line: Why is the "Receipt date" an editable field when creating a new PO line? If the user enters a receipt date this could cause confusion since the order hasn't actually been received through the Receiving app. Unless there are use cases for editing this field during PO line creation, could it be changed to an inactive field on this form to avoid mistakes and confusion? Screenshot to show that the "Receipt date" is editable on the Add PO line form:
Screenshot showing the PO Line details window after saving a new PO line with the receipt date populated and Receipt status showing "Awaiting Receipt" since the order hasn't been received yet through the Receiving app.
| 1/11/22 | Julie Brannon , Duke | Dennis Bridges to review logic for updating POL receipt date based on receiving actions. Review how this setting affects receipt status. For approval orders, a user may actually want to set the receipt date for the POL when creating the order. Clarify and discuss results of review with SIG. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 45 | POLs and Invoice lines: subscription dates. |
| Prompted by a question from Kimberly Pamplin at Texas A&M in slack on 1/12/22: "I notice that the "renewal date" and "subscription to" dates cannot be edited once an order is opened. Is it intended that these dates will update automatically? If so, what triggers them? I notice for example that filling in the subscription to and from fields will then populate them for invoice line creation, but I'm not sure how they are supposed to be updated once a subscription year is paid for." Also from Julie Brannon at Duke: The field labels are inconsistent between orders and invoices for these dates even though data flows from the order line to the invoice line. Is there a reason they're different, because if not, we should probably keep them consistent between apps: Order line: Subscription from, Subscription to | 1/12/22 | Dennis Bridges create story for allowing user to edit order subscription to date. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
46 | Control default values in Settings |
| Prompted by Slack discussion on 1/15/22. Request to control default values in settings. This relates to topics #24, #32, and #36 on this page. The ability to control default values for key fields in the Orders and Invoices apps would enable libraries to align the UI with their needs and improve the user experience. Eg. Checking the re-encumber checkbox. The library does a lot more orders that do not encumber and this was taking time and effort when creating orders. it can also be error-prone. Not using order templates for all orders. Eg. In invoices, we consistently have to remember to check "Lock Total" and uncheck "check subscription overlap" for different orders. Eg. Also need to remember to adjust "Export to accounting" checkbox and new Invoice line > "Release encumbrance". | 1/18/2022 | John Ballestro Julie Brannon, Duke | Dennis Bridges to create wiki page for collecting use cases for additional default settings. Users will add more detail to the description here. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 47 | Correcting POL link to Instance |
| What is the best way to recover from an Open POL linked to the wrong Instance record? We were able to relink the POL to the correct Instance by unopening the order, but on re-opening, it created a duplicate expected piece in Receiving and we could not see how to delete that duplicate piece. | 1/19/2022 | Julie Stauffer, Chicago | Change instance functionality has been implemented for the MG release. Users also have the ability to delete pieces from the Piece edit form. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 48 | Filtering receiving records |
| How to get a complete list of books of a subject purchased by the library over a period of time and filter by location? For example, how can we get a list of physics books that a certain location received in the past year? | 2/18/2022 | Tiewei Liu | The group has suggested filtering by received date, location and Call number. Call number could identify the subject. This could be produced by a reporting tool like LDP. In future we may reopen this issue as the majority of the data points are available and we could explore adding additional data to the Piece or order export when they are implemented using mod-data-export-spring. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 49 | Organization Delete Behavior |
| Currently, an organization record can be deleted even if the organization is in use on other records. No warning is given to the user that the organization is linked to exisitng records. This behavior seems inconsistent with other delete actions in FOLIO and could lead to unanticipated impacts if a user unknowingly deletes an organization that is in use elsewhere. After deletion of an organization, an order (for example) will display "Invalid reference" in the vendor code field.
| 3/15/2022 | Julie Brannon, Duke | Are there use cases for deleting an org for which you have active invoices or orders? Group: no other than a user having made a mistake creating a new vendor and processing a record against it there are no valid reasons for allowing deletion. Dennis Bridges to create a story that prevents deletion of organization record that are referenced by orders (Open or Closed) and Invoices (Approved or Paid, Canceled) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
50 | Invoice approve/pay with pending Order |
| The approvement/payment of an Invoice should not be allowed if the linked Order is pending since transactions will not behave as expected. Opening the Order after approval/paying creates new encumbrance transaction for current FY with values for Awaiting payment resp. Expended = $0.00 even though the Invoice is already processed. For this reason, the encumbrance/expended amount is not taken into account during FYRO. Right, it's the wrong workflow.But a warning would definitely help to address this issue. For my liking I would prefer a modal warning when approving and paying an Invoice with pending Order (with options Cancel/Proceed). Or even more restrictive just present an error message and not let it happen. I would really appreciate a solution for that since it caused a lot problems with us. Thanks for your consideration. Addendum: After fixing transactions on database level and bringing it to the attention of colleagues, this workflow error occurs again and again. Please contact Björn Muschall when this topic comes to agenda. Thanks! | 3/22/2022 | Björn Muschall, Leipzig | Group consensus is that we would should prevent approval and payment of invoices when they are related to one or more orders in the workflow state "Pending". Dennis Bridges to create story for implementing this. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 51 | Create Contact person or interface on organizations |
| When a user creates a new organization record and wants to add a new contact person or interface, the user needs to save the organization record first. In a second step the user needs to edit the organization record again, click on "add contact" to then create and link the new contact person (or interface). For a more fluent workflow with less clicking it would be helpful to be able to create a new contact or interface without needing to save the organization record first. |
| Dennis Bridges to review with development team to see if it is possible to implement a save and continue when you have a "dirty form". Option 2 would be separating the contact people and interface creation and assignment from the editing organization. Argument for is that often times reassigning a person involves editing their email etc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 52 | Receiving and closing POs |
| Can we change the business logic for automatically closing POs so once a one-time PO has all POLs listed as "Fully Paid" the PO will close regardless of the Receipt Status? As we get toward fiscal year close, we are facing a situation where we have a lot of POs (around 5000) that are open and will re-encumber because we have paid in advance of receiving. We are going to have to manually close all of these POs, which is obviously going to take away time from actually receiving. If there are use cases for wanting a PO to stay open, if paid, but not received, then can libraries be given the option to have paid POs closed regardless of receipt status? |
| It seems this is a good use case for bulk edit functionality. Being able to bulk edit order line receipt and Payment statuses. Also being able to bulk edit order workflow status. Dennis Bridges to share this use case with Magda Zacharska Dennis Bridges to Create an enhancement story/feature for "Long term, maybe we could eventually move toward enabling each institution to locally configure their business logic for automatically closing orders. In settings they could indicate what criteria should be met before an order is automatically closed by the system (receipt status, payment status)..." | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
53 | POL able to be deleted off of OPEN One-Time Order |
| [in Kiwi, hotfix 2] Is the following expected behavior? Scenario: I set up a One-Time Order, with one POL, Receiving Workflow: Sync ... & Create inventory: Instance, Holding, Item. ... I open the Order. Now in Inventory, I have an Instance with Marc as Source (previously imported to link Title to), a Holdings record, and an Item with Status OO. All good so far. ... Now I receive the item via the Receiving App. I check off: Display on holding. ... All good still. & Inventory the Item now shows status In Process, and the Holdings shows the Receiving history and Acquisition info. Just as I want: great. ... Now I go to Check-in, and check-in the Item, and in Inventory now the Item shows as Available. .... ... Now here is the thing I am really asking about: I go back to the OPEN Order Record, then to the POL--Fully Received, but not Fully Paid at this point--and I am able to Delete the POL--even without first having to UNopen the PO. And when I do that, the POL is gone, the Receiving record is gone, the Piece is gone, the Acquisitions and Receiving history info disappears from the Holdings record. .... The Item remains because Available (I assume) .... When the Item is In process, it also remains; but if On Order, it disappears. ... The Open PO also remains open, but has no POL, and so it a bit of a mystery thing. .... Once I have linked an Invoice (even if only Approved but not yet Paid) then the POL won't delete off an Open Order. .... Still, this does not seem like good behavior to me. I can see if I UNopen the PO then I should be able to delete the POL, but NOT if it is Open. If there is some reason for being able to do this, then at the very least there needs to be a pop-up modal that asks me to confirm that I want to do delete the POL EVEN THOUGH there is a Receiving Piece already received etc. | 28 April 2022 | Sara Colglazier | Dennis Bridges to create a story for preventing the deletion of POLs from Open or Closed one-time orders. There are use cases for removing a POL from an ongoing order so this logic needs to be more specific. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 54 | Capturing binding information for order and receiving so records can be filtered by this data |
| We would like to have a way of identifying Titles that represent material that will be sent for binding at a given point in the year–for example, in Receiving if there were a check box at the Receiving Title Record level for To be Bound or Bindery that one could then Filter on. We now include information in the Receiving Note that indicates that the title is a Bindery title, but one cannot search on the Receiving Note in the Receiving App. (I suppose we could use a Tag, but ...) It would be better if what indicates that the Title is a Bindery Title could be seen and filtered on from both the POL and Receiving Title record. ... Something more like the Rush or ?? I have a monthly magazine that I receive and at a certain point of the year when I have all issues for the year they will be sent to the bindery. What we plan to bind is revisited over time as the budget fluctuates. Some titles may no longer be bound to say money. Understanding what is being bound in orders in helpful for making purchase decisions. The information may also change over time so ideally these are editable at any stage of the orders lifecycle. Users that actually carry out the binding need this information in the receiving area to gather materials that need to be bound. Users need to access receiving to identify what needs to be bound. They also need information about how to bind and when (how long to retain issues before binding, how many issues to bind in a volume, whether to bind or discard etc.). Need to know a little more about how the user finds what needs to be bound and what historical information they need about this activity in receiving. |
| edited/updated 2022-09-26 | The limitation of tags for this use case is that they need to be applied in Orders and Receiving separately. More work and more prone to error. Dennis Bridges Create wiki page with use cases. Need feature for Capturing Binding information for order and receiving. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 55 | Add invoice payment method to voucher extract file |
| Invoices > Voucher export: We've noticed that the invoice payment method is missing from the voucher extract file output. Until the feature requested in #24 above is implemented (control export to accounting behavior based on payment method), we need a way to prevent credit card payment method invoices from being sent to our university Accounts Payable system. The user might forget to uncheck the export to accounting checkbox and we need a way to filter out those records as we extract/transform/load the FOLIO export file to our AP system. Looks like a JIRA exists for this request:
|
| Julie Brannon Duke University | JIRA issue create for including payment method
Related to topic #24 that still has no JIRA issue. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 56 | Display vendor invoice # on invoice line |
| Invoices > Invoice line: The screenshot below shows the detail pane for an invoice line. We've noticed that the vendor invoice number isn't displayed anywhere on this screen and it would be helpful for the user to know which vendor invoice they're reviewing (especially if they get distracted by another task and then return to their FOLIO work). |
| Julie Brannon Duke University | Concern shared by a number of other members of the SIG group. Need to create a JIRA story to implement a solution. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 57 | Finance: Currency setting for fund |
| The Finance > Fund displays a currency value which isn't editable during fund creation and is set to the primary currency set in Settings > Tenant > Language and localisation. Do any institutions need to have some funds desingated as a different currency than the tenant? I'm thinking through how to handle funds for Duke's campus in China and they would likely prefer to set up their funds with ¥/CNY/yuan as the basis rather than $USD. Update 8/17/22: Duke's campus in China will operate using their own instance of FOLIO, so this question is no longer relevant for Duke. |
| Julie Brannon Duke University | A logical approach here would be to expose the currency setting at the fiscal year level such that users could explicitly set it when creating a fiscal year. Dennis Bridges Need to create a JIRA. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 58 | Action performed on record bounces user to the top. |
| In invoices when you access an invoice line to review or edit and close out of the invoice line, it will bounce you back to the top of the invoice. PLEASE ADD MORE INFORMATION AND INCLUDE YOUR NAME SO WE KNOW WHO TO ASK FOR DETAILS. THX! | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 59 | Orders: Link to existing holding and item |
| Add ability to link an order with an existing item (not only with an instance). When material is purchased and the user creates a POL, holdings and items can be created in Inventory. But there are workflows - when working with a third party system for cataloguing -, where on order items are imported to Inventory. Those items cannot be linked to orders currently, the user can only create a link between order and instance. As a user, I need to indicate which item I have ordered. And what would happen if the item is moved in this scenario? Primary use case would be when items are created independently of the order records we would like users or third party tools to have the ability to connect the items to the order and update the order<>inventory links such that acq data is displayed appropriately in inventory. This is needed for both order types and receiving workflows. |
| Dennis Bridges need to create a feature. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 60 | Orders: Move PO line accordion |
| Orders UI: For ongoing orders we usually have to scroll down while viewing the PO Details screen to see the title information since there is an additional accordion section for ongoing orders. Could we discuss whether the layout could accommodate seeing the PO line titles further up since titles are such a critical data element when looking at orders? Maybe this is more challenging for institutions that have multiple PO lines, but for those with one PO line per order this could be a valuable user experience improvement.
Title sometimes appears below the fold which makes it difficult to find. Adding multiple notes to the PO accordion pushes the POL accordion down even further. Some users will increase font size (Zoom in) which also pushes the POL accordion off of the screen. |
| Julie Brannon Duke University | If the notes were to be collapsed by default with only one showing it would be helpful to include a bubble that shows how many there are. Bill to and Ship to can also be very long and could be truncated by default or something like that. On-going order information could potentially be shifted down. The subscription field would need to be kept near the top. It is key information for ongoing orders and should not appear below POLs PO summary could be collapsed into the PO accordion to save space. Dennis Bridges need to review with Kimie Kester | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 61 | Receiving: Receiving title are not removed when package POL instance links are changed |
| The only way to remove Receiving titles is to delete the POL. With Package POLs you may need to clean up the receiving titles but not want to remove the POL. Titles can even be linked in error and there is no way to correct that without deleting the entire POL. There are circumstances where we want to keep the receiving record and some when the user does not want to keep it. May have originally ordered a specific version from Amazon as a rush. Circumstances change but user wants to keep the order history so it can be communicated to the requester. In this case the Receiving title would need to be removed and the more relevant instance connected. | July 15, 2022 | Sara Colglazier | Dennis Bridges to create JIRA for review. need to consult devs about ability to remove R Titles. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 62 | Order templates |
| To speed up order template creation, it would be helpful to have these two options:
| Julie Brannon Duke | Group offered a number of use cases for making small changes to templates. Duplicate was the preferred approach. Dennis Bridges to create JIRA for Duplicate template and separate JIRA for create template from order at lower priority. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 63 | Receipt status for withdrawn items |
| When libraries withdraw and delete resources from the library system, they will delete items/holdings/instances in Inventory. The order and receiving record will stay in the system, but needs a status "withdrawn" (or similar), so that the system user knows this has been part of the libraries holdings, but is no more. Use case:
|
| Martina Schildt | Dennis Bridges to create JIRA for capturing item has been withdrawn in piece record. There is a status in inventory for item, this should potentially update the piece data point. Allow piece/order to be filterable. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 64 | Receiving against closed POs. |
| Prior to the end of our fiscal year, we closed all paid POs, so that they wouldn't re-encumber on rollover. Now we are receiving the pieces. For our monographs, this is working fine. The POL Receiving workflow was set to "Synchronized order and receipt quantity" and when the item is received, the POL Receipt Status does get updated to "Fully Received" and the PO remains closed. But for some individual series volume orders (which are one-time orders), the orders staff coded them as "Independent order and receipt quantity." Now staff are creating the piece(s) to be received and receiving it (them). This is creating two problems: 1.--the Receipt Status becomes "Partially Received" but there is nothing else to be received. 2.--the PO reopens (ack, ack, ack)! We can go to the POL, edit and change the status to "Fully Received" and this will close the PO again, but we would prefer to have the PO remain in a closed state. Dennis suggested on Slack: It’s the change in status that triggers the PO workflow status to change. Perhaps the receipt status should not be updated when receiving pieces against a closed order. OR the only update made should be to “Fully received” which would close the order if it wasn’t already closed. We like the second. We are using the "Awaiting Receipt" Status to track items to be received, so we wouldn't want to leave the POL in an Awaiting Receipt status. |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 65 | Add "Created by" filter to Invoices |
| We do not currently use Acquisitions Units, but we do have several departments creating invoices (one-time vs. ongoing). Normally these are all approved by one person, but when that individual is out of the office the invoices are approved within each department. We are looking for a way to filter the invoices so that departmental approvers only see those invoices that are relevant to them. As there are a limited number of users generating invoices, having a "Created by" filter (just like in the orders app) would be of benefit. |
| Kimberly Pamplin Texas A&M | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 66 | Order templates: View hidden fields while editing an order |
| Update 11/1/22: We can now see the Action menu option "Show hidden fields" while in edit mode, so this topic is resolved. Orders: In Lotus we can't view hidden fields while in Edit mode for an order that was created using a template that hides fields. We're concerned that if we hide a field and later need to adjust the value that was set in the template we won't have a way to edit the value on the order. |
| Julie Brannon Duke | No discussion required - resolved. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 67 | Order templates: Hide tags |
| We love the new hidden fields options in Settings > Orders > Order templates. We'd like to hide tags and wondered why the PO Tags and POL Tags and aren't "hideable"? Could we add that functionality in the future? |
| Julie Brannon Duke | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 68 | Receiving: Don't display "Receipt not required" orders |
| We're wondering why records display in the Receiving app for orders that are created with a Receipt status = "Receipt not required"? We're not seeing anything in the receiving app record to indicate that the order is a "Receipt not required" order, so they wouldn't know from the Receiving app that this order was set to "Receipt not required." |
| Julie Brannon Duke | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 69 | Orders: Configure whether material type is required |
| Orders: We'd like to make material type required for electronic order types so that users don't accidentally skip that field and it's important for tracking/reporting. Could that be configured by each institution in Settings > Orders so that institutions can decide whether to require material type based on order format (physical, electronic, P/E mix, other)? |
| Julie Brannon Duke | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 70 | Orders: API for third party vendors |
| We'd like to explore what other providers we could set up API's for - specifically, Kanopy and Amazon. | Mich State | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 71 | Invoices: Display of fund not always available without scrolling to the right |
| When approving invoices if the description is long I need to scroll right to view funds. Far better would be to move the fund next to the POL number or allow for customization of displays. | Scott Perry UChicago | Mich State | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 72 | Orders: warning before opening POL with unassigned funds |
| It would be nice to have a warning coming up when you want to open a POL and there is still an amount remaining to be distributed in the fund distribution. The warning could be something like: “There is still a remaining amount to be distributed. Do you really want to open this order?” |
| Sven Thomsen | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 73 | Display currency on Fiscal Year and Budget |
| Could we consider displaying the currency associated with a Fiscal year record and also display currency on the budget? Currently, we can only see the currency on the Fund detail pane. This came up because Molly Driscoll noticed some odd behavior when the snapshot environment tenant currency was changed from USD to PLN.
Dennis explained that "in some places on the order we show currency based on "currency setting" in tenant settings. However, transactions are converted based on the budget currency. Which is set based on the fiscal year currency. The fiscal year currency is set based on the currency setting when the fiscal year is created." When she looked at the JSON for the fiscal year, I could see that the fiscal year currency was, in fact, USD, which accounted for the converted encumbrance. Molly brought this to my attention to request that folio.docs.org documentation be updated to explain this expected behavior, but I think it would also help if users could view the currency value assigned to a Fiscal Year and to a budget to help troubleshoot in the event that they change their default currency in Tenant > Settings. Currently, the currency value is displayed only at the Fund level. |
| Julie Brannon Duke | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 74 | Renewals integration (EBSCONET) |
| Could Publisher Cancellation Policy received from the EBSCONET Renewal Integration flow into the e-resource agreement line(s)? |
| 5C | Aaron please feel free to add more details regarding a use case here. This was mentioned to me by Anne Campbell and I'd like to discuss with the group. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 75 | Add Accession number during receiving |
| An Accession number is not infrequently assigned during the Receiving process. It would be helpful if the accession number could be entered during receiving and this information could be transferred to the item, just like the call number. In this context, we would also like to discuss the implementation of the number generator currently under development, which would also be valuable in Receiving. UXPROD-144 exists, however, this is linked to Inventory epic at the moment. Please inform Martina Tumulla and Björn Muschall when topic will be discussed. |
| André Hohmann SLUB Dresden | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 76 | Delete connected item when piece is deleted from Receiving app |
| When you delete a receiving record for a withdrawn periodical I would also like the option to delete the item record. As it is, I have to delete both separately and it is a lot of clicking. The receiving record says connected but it doesn't delete the connected item record and vice versa. |
| Molly Driscoll on behalf of Lisa Hoskins Lisa Paul Meek Library | Lisa Hoskins | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 77 | Orders: Spelling inconsistency in UI |
| Orders app: The hover text for a cancelled purchase order or order line displays "Canceled"; however, the Reason for closure field uses the spelling "Cancelled." Please change the hover text for consistency with other field labels and values which use double "l" (Examples: "Cancellation restriction", "Cancellation description").
|
| Julie Brannon Duke | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 78 | Orders: Keyword search orders by instance HRID |
| Staff at Duke are accustomed to searching for orders based on a bibliographic record system ID. The equivalent in FOLIO is the instance HRID; however, the Orders app doesn't currently offer instance HRID as a search keyword. We're curious to know whether other institutions would find that useful as well. | Julie Brannon Duke | Mich State | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 79 | Receiving and Invoices: clicking on "receive" from a POL can bring up more than one POL |
| At Chicago, many POs were migrated from earlier systems, so some have very long PO numbers. When clicking on "Receive" from the drop down menu from the POL, a search is initiated by the POL number to bring up the Receiving record. But the search is a keyword string, as opposed to an exact match. As a result, if the string of one POL number is contained in another POL number, this results in multiple results, which is confusing. It would be better to have an exact search to avoid confusion when trying to receive. Example video here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YOw9OH1FMFy6aEfzU2Fn6bbVYBewpdnL/view?usp=sharing. The number "54338" bring ups that POL for receiving but also the POL for "454338." The search for a POL to add to an invoice line has the same issues. |
| UChicago | Mich State | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 80 | Provide comparable Invoice line to invoice navigation as POL to PO navigation. |
| Recently, I went to look at an invoice in our Chicago FOLIO instance. Our Payments unit is scanning an uploading images directly in FOLIO (so awesome!) under Links & Documents on the Invoice. On the POL, I clicked on the Invoice Line # under "Related Invoice lines. This took me to the invoice line, but not the invoice. When on this page, it's not immediately obvious how to actually view the full invoice (and for me, get to the attached scanned image). I went under the Actions menu, to see if there was a "View Invoice" as there is on the POL to "View PO," but there was nothing. I ended up searching for the invoice to bring it up. My colleague shared with me that if you click the X by invoice line, that will close the line and bring up the invoice, but this isn't at all obvious. Could this have a more intuitive way to navigation from invoice line to invoice (and preferably similar to how it works with PO/POL)?
|
| Uchicago | Dung-Lan Chen | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 81 | Enabling the deactivation of obsolete parameter values |
| At SLUB Dresden, obsolete parameter values are currently deactivated for users to avoid their use. However, the values should still be available for evaluations or administrative tasks. It is proposed that obsolete values of parameters can be deactivated in FOLIO. Please inform André Hohmann when the topic will be discussed. |
| André Hohmann, Silvana Kirschner | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 82 | Picklists for country and language |
| Is it possible to use the DIN standard (ISO-639)? The selection should only contain current (living) languages and country names as a selection option in the UI - e.g. Old English would not be used as default language for an organization |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 83 | Export transaction list from Finance |
| Finance - Villanova University would like to be able to filter and export transaction details from budgets in the Finance app. |
| Molly Driscoll on behalf of Villanova University | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 84 | Specify credential access at the interface level |
| Organizations - Currently, the ability to view interface credentials is all or nothing with permissions. Villanova University would like to be able specify at the interface level who has access to credentials. For example, for an organization, perhaps everyone can access the reports interface credentials, but only acquisitions managers should be able to access invoice/payment portal interface credentials for that same organization. |
| Molly Driscoll on behalf of Villanova University | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 85 | Configuration to enforce entry of lock total |
| Invoices - Villanova University would like a configuration added to Invoice settings to force entry of a lock total amount on all invoice records. |
| Molly Driscoll on behalf of Villanova University | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 86 | Invoice Templates | Invoices – it would be very helpful to have Invoice Templates like for Orders. We key in far more Invoices than we EDI them in. Templates would save us time, clicking/entry, and help us not forget to toggle on or off certain things. |
| Sara Colglazier (MHC/5C) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 87 | Display Vendor Name (Code) (as well as Vendor Invoice # – see above #56 – on Invoice Line | Invoices – It would be helpful to have the Header on an Invoice Line display not just "View invoice line - 1" etc but also who the Vendor is (Name with Code in paren following) & what the Vendor Invoice Number is. Otherwise one has to click back to the Invoice itself to orient oneself. Or, depending on how one got to the Invoice in the first place, drag the 3rd pane smaller again to maybe see if the info is in the middle/2nd pane, which it is not necessarily, or obviously, available depending. E.g., Not Obvious: OR just not there (in the middle pane–so one has to X out of the invoice line):
and if I do that I had better remember what my invoice line or title was to be able then to get back to it again:
|
| Sara Colglazier (MHC/5C) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 88 | Display Vendor (Name with Code) in Order Line Header along with POL # (akin to #87 above) | When I am in the Order Line, I do not know with what Vendor I have placed the/an Order. (The Material supplier in the Physical or Electronic resource detail accordion is not necessarily the same! and even when it is, the info is not where it is needed.) ... So if I do a Order Line Search by Title, I have to X out of my result to see with whom I have the title on order, and in some cases, if my search has multiple results, I have to click on one after the other and each time out from the POL view (not a perfect example, but mostly so): >>> to the POL view >>> Material Supplier NOT our Vendor Name/Code and so to see that I need to now Click on Actions & then Click on View PO ... which will take me to the PO, but then I will have lost my initial search & results: |
| Sara Colglazier (MHC/5C) |
...