Axiell Quria Ideas

Welcome to the Ideas Portal for Quria users!
Axiell invites customers to contribute ideas for new features or functions. While we can't develop every suggestion, your input helps shape Quria’s roadmap. You are welcome to add ideas, vote on others’ suggestions, and discuss them. To make this portal more effective, please submit your ideas in English.

Ideas are regularly reviewed by the product manager or local representative. Once reviewed, the ideas are visible for voting and discussion. Popular ideas will be prioritized within our backlog.

Status meanings:

  • Under investigation: Developers and specialists are discussing if the idea is possible to implement.

  • Planned: The suggestion will be fulfilled in some way in a foreseeable future

  • Future consideration: A good idea, without technical obstacles, but it can't be prioritized into the roadmap at the moment.

  • No action: Technical or other issues prevent development, or an alternative solution exists.

We reserve the right to reject ideas and to close issues after 3 months if we don't receive answers to follow-up questions.

For technical issues, please contact your local support.

Process of incorrectly merged records

The merging of records for imported records is a useful feature in Quria. However, sometimes it brings records together that do not belong to each other.

To separate such wrong merged records is not an easy and fast process. Therefore, we would suggest that e.g. a message would appear before an imported record is merged. In this message, it should be possible to decide, if the record should merge or not.

  • Sibylle Schlumpf
  • Oct 5 2020
  • Future consideration
Collections / Switzerland
  • Attach files
  • Morten Nørgaard Berg commented
    16 Oct, 2020 12:12pm

    Dear Sibylle,

    Unfortunately, we do not see a safe solution.

    If it is an identical title and author, it will be like this.

    We cannot look at publishers, because the same book can be published by different publishers over time and then there will be another manifestation of the same work. On the other hand, one might assume that fiction should be matched as it is today, while for non-fiction it can be checked at publishers, but it feels a bit insecure and also makes it even harder to grasp and troubleshoot.

    We can also not build a function for approval of match and merge, because in a bulk import, there would be “stop and go”. But we will try to think about it when we deliver bulk metadata. Can we deliver a tool so users can catch them a little now and then?

    For example, search for all manifestations that have been created during a certain time, back in time, and then see where they have ended up? But what to do next? Then you have two works with the same creator / title and then comes a third, which one should it be merged with then? Not an easy task, but we understand what you mean and will keep it in mind for bulk metadata.

    For the moment, the best thing to do, is to create a new Work and move the manifestation there.

    Thanks, Morten

    Attachments Open full size
  • Sibylle Schlumpf commented
    15 Oct, 2020 10:29am

    Dear Morten,

    Here three examples of manifestations merged on a wrong work (see ticket SR00060726):

    978-3-8342-3093-5 (Berlin)

    978-3-8317-3248-7 (Paris)

    978-3-616-01044-1 (Gardasee)

    It often happens with comics, but I don't have an example right now.

    Best regards,
    Sibylle

    Attachments Open full size
  • Morten Nørgaard Berg commented
    9 Oct, 2020 07:13am

    Dear Sibylle,

    Would it be possible for you to send a few examples?

    Thanks, Morten

    Attachments Open full size

Related ideas