Recent discussions around Bookmarking items following the Aspire release posting of 29th September led to the idea of having a set of 'default' notes that library staff could use to provide further information about items on a list. For example, 'Licensed for use only by students registered on this course' is one that we regular use (currently adding this in the Study note field).

Ian pointed out that ideally the Study Note should stay as such, for use by tutors to guide students learning and I am in agreement with this. So, it would be useful to have a set of default notes that could be customisable by systems administrators and assigned to the Library-acquisitions role for library staff to add additional information about access or use of an item on a list.

The extension of the number of publishers, platforms and online services with which the Bookmarklet is compatible will be a key requisite for widespread academic adoption, and I've a number of suggestions:

1) Customers should be able to view a domain level report, filterable by time span, of the 'most popular' domain sources of Bookmarked items in their tenancy

2) Customers should try to agree a priority list of publishers and platforms to assist Talis in identifying the priorities for the expansion of the Bookmark's coverage

3) Talis should publish (for customers) a guide indicating how the Bookmark works on different publisher platforms (e.g. what identifiers does it extract; where does it look for them; etc), to help customers understand the processes involved

4) In the future, Talis should consider customer contributions to extending the Bookmarklet's coverage

Replace the bookmarklet with an open FF add-on, in a smililar manner to libX. If this were to happen, small library systems teams could add simple configs / scripts that recognised the resources being browsed by the academic and then extract necessary urls, encode them or inset proxy domains however the local institution operates. Then we could push updated configs out the academics as a new version when they open their browser. This would give a little more freedom to Talis customers who have the ability to make developments so that librarians do not need to make manual entries into Talis Aspire. Also, as it is open, modified code could be shared with other library customers in the "Talis community". It might also able the insistituion to develop their own add-on UI.

To enable the Acquisitions Library Review process to support more complex workflows, it could be extremely useful to introduce the idea of 'states' (or similar) to lists under Review. Customers could select how many 'states' their workflow necessitates and what labels they wish to attach to 'State 1', 'State 2' and so on (e.g. 'Liaison Librarian review', 'Link checking', 'Acquisitions processing' etc). Lists submitted for review could arrive in 'State 1' and then be moved to 'State 2', 'State 3' as this review process progresses. The view of lists under Review could then be filtered according to State (e.g. 'Show me all the lists under Review currently assigned to the Acquisitions team). Rather than the current Review process (Submitted for, Under review, Completed), the concept of states would allow customers to devise a richer workflow which mapped to local requirements without requiring Talis to build prescriptive review workflows.

To enable reporting on the Reviews process (to support Library KPIs and the like) this could be tied to a reporting schema which identified the total processing time of a list under review and the amount of time a list took to pass through each State.

In addition, some additional permissions settings could make Acquisitions permissions more granular in nature (by associating Acq permissions with particular States).

Unless otherwise specified, we ensure that our online reading lists always point to the latest version of books and e-books we hold in stock. At the moment, it is necessary to manually replace each link with a new one pointing to the catalogue record for the new edition.

It would save a lot of time and effort if when item were added to a list it was possible to opt for it to update to newer editions of the same item when these are added to stock, perhaps by Aspire running an overnight title/author search of the catalogue for all items pointing to catalogue records and identifying new editions based on parsed recognition of the the edition statement (MARC 250 $a field).