Your Opinion Matters! Help Choose the New Catalog Homepage

[matekiss]

Imagine a storefront that instantly draws in learners, making it easy to explore and enroll. That’s what we’re building for you—and we need your help to make it perfect.

Your feedback has been crucial in shaping Catalog’s new storefront, and now, we’re giving you the power to vote on the default Homepage template for the first release!

Why This Matters

The Homepage is the first thing users see when they visit your Catalog storefront. It should be:

• Intuitive – Easy to navigate and find what’s needed quickly.
• Visually appealing – Modern and professional for an engaging experience.
• Optimized for ease of use – Seamless from discovery to enrollment.

Your vote will directly shape this first version! In the future, we’ll introduce multiple Homepage templates, but for now, we need your input to choose the best starting point.

How You Can Help

• Review the design options: View them here
• Vote for your favorite: Take the survey
• Tell us what you think: Share your feedback on what works, what could be better, and any ideas you have.

Key Questions to Consider

• Is the navigation clear and user-friendly?
• Does the layout highlight the most important information?
• Would customization options (e.g., colors, content sections) be valuable?
• Are there any elements that feel unnecessary or distracting?

Voting closes March 20! Don’t miss out!

Your Voice Matters—Vote Now!

Your opinion will shape the future of Catalog and make the storefront more user-friendly, visually appealing, and effective.

We believe in designing with you, not just for you—so let’s build something amazing together!

Click here to vote!

Thank you for being part of this journey!

[chriscas]

Hi @matekiss,

Thanks for the opportunity to vote / provide feedback!  Would it be possible for you to describe in text the main differences between the options provided?  Some seem to have different content arrangements, while others may be changing the header design.  It's also not clear what we could customize/theme and what would be basically untouchable, making it difficult for me to choose one.

If a redesign is coming, I'd rather have all of the options come out at once rather than have a single option come out (that we'd need to make sure fits our liking), then have more options again in a few months.  Things that seem to be just minor visual changes tend to have consequential unforeseen issues, so I'd rather minimize the number of times things are changing.

-Chris

[emc2]

Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback on the homepage templates! I'm a little hesitant to add my feedback to this because, from my understanding, the new storefront does not support custom CSS and JS. We use quite a bit of custom scripting because of the limitations for listing management in sub-catalogs (e.g. removing drop course button, customizing closed listing messages, removing "self-paced" from listings that don't have specific start and end dates, etc.). We also have sub-catalogs that use different branding based on their own department branding standards.

Will the new store front eventually support this?

Thanks!

- Emily

[matekiss]

Hello @chriscas 

Really appreciate you taking a moment to share your thoughts! I totally get where you're coming from, and yes, making sure this whole transition feels as smooth as possible is definitely something we're thinking about. Each Homepage version starts with a "Key Highlights" section—it’s basically a quick breakdown of what’s different between the options. The idea is to make it super easy to spot what’s unique about each one without having to dig through every little detail. Everything mentioned in the Key Highlights section can be customized by the admins.

We know that switching things up too often can get pretty frustrating, so instead of making frequent changes, we’re rolling out one default option first—something that, in a way, reflects what the community has been asking for. That said, I totally hear your point about keeping things stable, and yes, the goal is to introduce new templates in a way that doesn’t disrupt everything.

If there’s anything that doesn’t sit right with you or if you have any suggestions that would make this work better, definitely let me know! This first version is just the start, and your input could really shape what’s coming next.

Best,
Máté

[matekiss]

Hi Emily @emc2,

I really appreciate you taking the time to share your feedback! I totally get why you'd be hesitant if your team relies on custom CSS and JS to manage Catalog the way you need it. One of our main goals with the new storefront is to reduce the need for custom scripts by making key improvements directly in Catalog. A couple of things that might already help:

• Removing the "Self-Paced" label – This was recently addressed, so you no longer need a workaround for it! You can check out the details here.
• Hiding the drop course button – There’s now a built-in setting for this, so you don’t have to rely on custom JS. More info on how to configure it here.

For branding across different sub-catalogs, I hear you. We know how important it is for departments to maintain their own unique look and feel. The good news is that we’re actively working on enabling the new storefront per sub-catalog this quarter. This will give you more flexibility in managing branding at a more granular level, so you won’t have to rely on custom CSS for department-specific themes.

If there are specific branding or listing management needs that are a must for your team, I’d love to hear more so we can factor them into our plans. Let me know what would make the biggest impact for you!

Thanks again for sharing your thoughts—it really helps shape where we go next.

Best,
Máté

[emc2]

@matekiss Thank you! It looks like the 'Hide drop course button' feature is only available at the root catalog level. Will there be an option in the future that would add this feature at a sub-catalog level? We have one sub-catalog that would like to have this feature turned on while most want it disabled. 

Thanks!

[matekiss]

@emc2 Yes, that is something that is among our Q2 plans. I will keep you posted on this.

[emc2]

I've been looking at the New Storefront in our beta instance it seems like it is getting closer to our needs. It looks great but there are still a few areas that are still keeping us from using the New Storefront:

• Lack of ability to include CSS or JS or some other way to be able to make adjustments to the headers and footers. For example, for some of our colleges, their footers show college specific information. Like our College of Education has their footer text customized to be their campus address: 
  • "The University of Iowa College of Education, 240 South Madison Street, Iowa City, IA 52242"
• Testing out some sub-account customizations to see how the branding for different colleges looks, there is a contrast issue that would need to be fixed for accessibility purposes. The header background for one of our colleges is yellow. So any white text would immediately blend in and be lost if we can't change that text to black.
  • 

Thank you for all your work on Catalog!

[matekiss]

Hello @emc2,

Thanks so much for sharing this feedback, it’s really helpful. Glad to hear the New Storefront is getting closer to meeting your needs, and I appreciate you calling out the specific areas that are still blockers.

On the CSS/JS side, the footer customization example makes total sense. Just to make sure we’re capturing everything: are there any other adjustments your team’s hoping to make that aren’t currently supported? Or is the footer text the main piece we should be focused on? The more context we have, the better we can prioritize the right solutions.

Also I totally hear you on the contrast issue. That yellow header and white text combo is definitely an issue worth checking for accessibility. I’ll make sure it gets addressed.

Appreciate your time and all the thoughtful detail you included. Let’s keep the conversation going as you keep testing things out.

Best,
Máté

[GarethLogan]

Hi @matekiss 

Thanks so much for all the updates and your engagement with the community — it’s really appreciated.

Am I right in saying that currently, the login button at the top right of the Catalog homepage (or any sub-catalog page) defaults to whatever the primary authentication method is for the connected Canvas instance? For example, if the Canvas instance uses Microsoft Entra for primary authentication, that becomes the default for Catalog too.

We’ve recently been exploring different ways of configuring Catalog for both internal and external users, and being able to select or route authentication differently for sub-catalogs would be hugely beneficial in supporting a wider range of use cases.

Is this something that could potentially be considered for a future release? I think it could offer a lot of flexibility for institutions managing multiple user groups.

Thanks again for all your work and support!

Best, Gareth

[matekiss]

Hi @GarethLogan,

Thanks a lot for your comment and for sharing your thoughts. I really appreciate how much you’re digging into how Catalog can support different user groups.

Good news: we actually already have a solution for what you’re describing! It’s currently behind a feature flag, but we can definitely set it up for you if you're interested.

If you want to check it out, you can see a live example here: https://register.opencatalog.gmu.edu/.
Just click the login button and you’ll see how it gives users a choice depending on whether they’re internal or external.

If you'd like to get this going for your own Catalog, just fill out this quick form:
Request Setup Form
Our engineering team will take it from there and set everything up for you.

Thanks again for raising this, it’s exactly the kind of feedback that helps us keep improving.

Best,
Máté

[GarethLogan]

Hi @matekiss  thanks so much for the quick response—great news! We've completed the form and are looking forward to testing this out.

As part of our implementation, we've been reflecting on how roles and permissions are structured within Catalog. Apologies if this has been raised before, but I wanted to share some feedback from our experience so far.

At present, there are only two core roles available, and while the Sub Catalog Admin role does offer some very helpful toggles (e.g. for promotions and cross-listings, integrations etc), we've found the current setup could potentially carry certain risks. Specifically, Sub Catalog Admins are able to enable enrolments on any Canvas course, regardless of whether they have access to it in Canvas. This creates a potential for user error—particularly since many courses have similar names—and raises concerns around accidental visibility or enrolment issues.

From our perspective, it would be really valuable if there were a way to restrict Sub Catalog Admins to only work with courses they already have access to in Canvas. We recognise this is partly a matter of internal governance, but in a large institution, additional safeguards can be very helpful.

We also wondered if limiting the ability of Sub Catalog Admins to create new catalogs within their assigned catalog could be a useful permission control to consider.

Thanks again!

[matekiss]

Hi @GarethLogan ,

Thanks so much for filling out the form and for sharing your experience, it’s really appreciated.

What you brought up about Subcatalog Admins and the current permission structure definitely resonates. I can see how being able to enroll users in any Canvas course, regardless of access, could create challenges, especially in larger institutions where similar course names are common. Same with the ability to create new catalogs, it makes total sense to want more control there.

This is great feedback and something we’re adding to our backlog for further discovery. It’s a valuable use case and exactly the kind of insight that helps shape where we focus next.

I’ll make sure to reach out as soon as we have any updates or early wireframes to share on this. It would be great to get your thoughts during that phase as well.

Thanks again for taking the time to write this up and for being such a thoughtful partner.

Best,
Máté

[GarethLogan]

Thanks @matekiss

Thanks so much for your thoughtful reply — it’s really appreciated.

It was a pleasure to share the feedback, and I’m glad it resonated. I really value the quick response and the openness to explore these areas further.

I’d be more than happy to offer feedback on any future developments or wireframes as things progress — it would be a pleasure to support that process.

Best regards,
Gareth

[MossCMoss]

Hello.

I'm wondering about the results of this vote. Which template was chosen, and when might it be available for us to test? 

Thanks! 

[matekiss]

Hello @MossCMoss,

The most voted design was this one. The plan is to bring this to you in the first half of 2026. As soon as I have a more specific date, I’ll communicate it through the platform and here on the Product Blog as well.

Best,
Máté