Attendees
Christine Kim (Unlicensed) Chrissy Rissmeyer (she/her) (Unlicensed) Claudia Horning (Unlicensed) Gabriela Montoya (Unlicensed) Jerrold Shiroma (Unlicensed) Madelynn Dickerson (Unlicensed) Rachel Jaffe
Notetaker rotation: Boehlert, Horning, Jaffe, Kim, Montoya, Rissmeyer, Shiroma
Item | Desired Outcome | Time | Who | Notes | Decisions | Actions | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Review action items from last meeting | 10 mins | Madelynn / All | Action items related to updating the draft report were completed. | Carry-over action item: Jerrold Shiroma (Unlicensed) will prepare the final report and appendices as a PDF. Chrissy Rissmeyer (she/her) (Unlicensed) will share accessibility guidelines with Jerrold. | ||
| 2 | Feedback from Operations Team, any others who reviewed final report draft | 10 mins | All | Madelynn met with members of the Operations Team (steering committee); they may invite Madelynn again next week. Met with the chair and vice-chair; they had not yet seen the draft, so provided live feedback. They were impressed by the draft report, as well as the level-of-detail. Had conversations about what this work may look like post-DCTP. Initial thought is that the Operations team is the logical group to distribute the questionnaire. They thought DCPT did an excellent job of identifying next steps; they will share the link to document to the rest of the Operations team for feedback on the draft report. If they provide any critical/large feedback, it can go in as recommendations for the next phase of group to take on. Feedback from Operations: Needs to be more of this team! DCPT was very effective in communicating that this work needs to continue; however it doesn’t fit into the charge of any other group. Madelynn suggested that if there is such a group, it should not be a short-term group, and there needs to be a shift to operationalizing this work (removing deadlines, consider burnout or current and previous members, etc.) Operations will be putting together a new, permanent sub-team for digital collections work. | NA | NA | |
| 3 | Final group review of final report | 25 mins | All | Madelynn shared the draft report with Jolene (previously on the Digital Collections Functional Group). Group went through the draft report to address Jolene’s comments and questions. Group discussed how to frame ways to represent digital collections in UC Library Search. Updated examples of digital collections represented in UC Library Search. Visibility Pre-Assessment Questionnaire: Unclear what will happen with the results of the questionnaire; for future teams to identify. Also questions about the benefit of conducting this questionnaire – would provide an overview of digital collections needs/practices across library campuses. Appendix D: Big cluster of URLs removed. Also removing “URLs” for each test case, which point to the Sandbox (as the Sandbox will likely be cleared out, and the URLs would break). Appendix E: Digital Collections FG and Discovery FG – cleaning up the notes. Appendix F: Digital collections for testing – cleaning up the tables (removing campus contact; XML filename; Primo URL), as these are not relevant. | |||
| 4 | |||||||
| 5 | Wrap up | Review actions and decisions | 5 | Final meeting next week, and will conduct a final review! | |||
| 6 | Parking Lot | Capture important topics for future discussion | |||||
| 7 | Total | 50/50 |
...