| 1 | Check-in / updates | Helping to support each other by making space for initial discussion. | 2:30-3:00 | Chair | Round robin - everyone! Welcome Christine! Liz M: working on a bunch of decision pages, including ILSDC stuff coming in. Bib file deadlines are biggest challenge right now. Deadlines are uncomfortably short. Has a co-chair, Sarah Wallbank Caitlin: Just sent an email to ExL letting them know that their deadlines are not acceptable. Aware that tensions are very high in ICs and FGs trying to meet the vanguard deadlines. The worst case scenario is not a messy vanguard test environment, but not having the Vanguard at all. BUT, ExL has not given us sufficient time to actually extract the data (in any condition) by the proposed deadline. The worst case scenario is not a messy vanguard test environment, but not having the Vanguard at all. BUT, ExL has not given us sufficient time to actually extract the data (in any condition) by the proposed deadline. Xiaoli: we really need a balance of how much time we want to play versus prepare - because all the time we take to prepare our data takes away from assessment of the test data. Don’t want to push too far away from Ex Libris timeline. What is the MVP to get in the vanguard? John Riemer of UCLA is the co-chair. Still working on team building and visioning. Visioning has actually turned out to be more challenging than anticipated. Hopes to finish this by June. Lisa: Agree - we need to ratchet down the stakes for the vanguard and just say: extract the data! Ex Libris is trying to understand how CDL and the data stores are shaped. Instead of wanting to massage any data beforehand, just run the extract and load it in! We can test once we’re in. Prepping Q&A for ExL call. How will NZ vendor zone be built. Other issues surround SCP & P2E decision. Carla Arbagey at UCR will co-chair. Recommendations will depend on understanding how CDL group gets established before they can create more decision pages Claudia: Appointed Rachel Jaffe fro UCSC to be co-chair on Dig-Col. Under much less pressure as they make decisions. They are meeting with ExL on 6/1. Beth: Almost done with a decision rubric and will share with PPC at next meeting. It is a series of questions that they will use to apply to any issues that come to their EL. No issues right now  Currently, no need for regular meetings. May go to a brief check in every other week until they have issues before them. Josephine: Jess Waggoner (UCSC) is her co-chair. Would like to add her co-chair to basecamp. For the ITS, went through the list of Alma initial training. Neil thinks that PPC members may need to become Alma certified, but not members of the FGs. Discovery is meeting with ExL on Tuesday. SUNY information has been very useful. Info is organized. SUNY Albany: library.albany.edu has a nice interface. Liz R: Joe Ferrie from CDL is her co-chair. They have passed their first 2 decisions back to patron Data. A third decision is coming to the decision page soon. They have had consensus on decisions thus far. After meeting with ExL, they will begin discussing loan periods. Challenge has been in trying to make decisions, the ExL documentation is not easily discoverable (leads to lots of bunny holes) and not always sufficient when found. Danelle: Mary Elings (UCB Bancroft) will serve as co-chair; they are preparing questions for ExL, but noticing that many of them are similar to others being asked. Spec. Coll. is often overlooked in previous migrations to Alma and is concerned this will happen again. There are certain issues that are only relevant to special collections. They are losing functionality of findability of their materials - particularly for certain material types such as manuscripts. They also have to integrate 3rd party applications such as Calisphere. What is the protocol for communicating their concerns to FGs to move things forward if no escalation issues are brought to them? Liz M: SC is on the minds of Resource Management group. RM FG is drafting what they think makes sense in terms of fields that enable discovery of SC materials and will send to the CKG for review. Are discovery issues a problem with indexing?
| Remember that decisions are for VANGUARD only - can we tag this in the decision page somehow? PMs will figure out how to change the decision page template. If you want to add your co-chair to basecamp, chairs can make that request themselves in basecamp Config form is where you have to make the decisions. Use the sandbox to play for 6 months to help inform. Remember that we will still be learning after we migrate - decisions now do not have to be perfect. | - Christine Barone (Unlicensed) to bring the suggestion of the communication pathways to the Com and PM Leads: send a communication out to the Cohort about communication channels about the relationship between local groups and SILS groups. And what are the appropriate lines of communication.
- Christine Barone (Unlicensed)Caitlin Nelson to bring up to COMleads / PMOLs idea of changing decision template to include “scope = vanguard” somewhere.
|
| 2 | Decision page review | Get caught up on Decisions | 3:00-3:30 | | All-decision Rollup Make sure to record reasons / reasoning for decision (change the template)? Make sure to note if the final decision should be final vetted by PPC again, or not. How is the Decision template working for you? Do we need new categories? What do you think about Decision pages going public? Do you need to create working pages in Google drive that are private? How to decide when to go private or public?
Talk about: https://uc-sils.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/IC/pages/495485291/Order+of+Network+Zone+Record+Loading+-+Vanguard | How will we let other groups know that a decision has been made? This should be documented in the action log. Chairs should record in the action log on the decision page the actions they took such as which group(s) the decision(s) were shared with. | - PPC members will review and respond with approval vote by June 3rd.
|