| Item | Desired Outcome | Time | Who | Notes | Decisions | Actions |
|---|
| 1 | Check-in / updates | | 2:30-32:00pm 55pm (30 25 mins) | All | The decision for loading SCP/SFX data has been revised after several meetings with ExL. Shifts the focus on looking for what data is missing and providing it, rather than cleaning up the data/duplicates which would be overwhelming. RMFG will be looking at forming a small subgroup to talk about local authorities and also looking at testing OCLC update service during the Vanguard. DCFG: We’ve finished our environmental scan. Now we’re starting to assess how other universities are using Primo to make digital collections discoverable; also starting to investigate impact/opportunities in SILS for HathiTrust Fulfillment: will meet with Cathy and Lynne (from the RLF SILS Planning Group, co-chairs) to discuss RLFs with Ex Libris, particularly ensuring the rota reflects our preference for RLFs first in our test fulfillment network. Elizabeth will summarize what we desire to provide to Ex Libris. Requests such as this should go through the PM group to coordinate with Ex Libris PM. AcqERM: Started 3 subgroups to follow up on our related configuration form items; continuing our testing discussion. Caitlin was asked by GOBI for a meeting to describe their services; this will now be passed off to TSELG. Danelle thanked Caitlin for visiting ASCELG and describing the governance structure and how their group fits in and how decisions flow through the structure. Lots of concerns around cataloging or discovery in ASCELG. Danelle asked if Liz (RM) and Josephine (Discovery) would speak to ASCELG about what’s happening to address archives and special collections in their groups.
| | |
| 2 | Configuration Form work | Understand and document which lines in the config form are “under consideration” | 2:55?-3:00 (5 min) | Caitlin | FGs should document their work, status, recommendations here: Vanguard Configuration Form Audience: local campus group or IC who is filling out the config form. Do you only want line items under considerations or should we put everything? Put everything. New row for each item? Yes. Repeat the tab name for each row. Mostly Liz, Lisa and Elizabeth’s are the relevant groups who will be doing this work. | Finish vanguard configuration form “holds” by August 7 | |
| 3 | Timeline Review | Awareness of upcoming activities | 3:00-3:10 (10 min) | Caitlin | Caitlin’s Working copy: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ci0jtgDusouiJRkMyLrq4EXj10_EsU6epqWcdXRlDSY/edit#gid=0 Basecamp to-dos: https://3.basecamp.com/3765443/buckets/15553579/todosets/2379093663Resource management par Special topics: Shared Vendor tentative for August 27th. They want questions and “what exactly do you want to learn about” two weeks in advance = Aug 13th deadline to Basecamp | | |
| 4 | Training upcoming (recurring agenda) Ex Libris Meetings - Vanguard | Awareness of upcoming vanguard training. Chairs to remind their groups. | 3:10-3:15pm (5 mins) | Caitlin | | | |
| 5 | SILS Chairs meeting | Awareness of upcoming agendas; Surface topics for discussion; Seek advice and volunteers to present. | 3:15-3:20 (5 mins) | Lena | | | |
| 6 | Testing coordination for the Vanguard environment and configuration | ILS Data Cleanup group on coordinating testing planning with the FGs: What balls are there, and who’s got them? Should test cases and findings be shared and how? | 3:20-3:40 (20 min) | Caitlin, Catherine Busselen, TJ Kao | This is the URL to the Vanguard testing scenarios draft ILSDC has been working on: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dFi7lbwbrXzYd4rr_rlvKcQCT0LRGKw7EzzxcuEgBeE/edit?usp=sharing These are a huge number of checklist items to go over! Not everything will apply to each campus. Initially we looked at the harmonization and data cleanup that was made, but that was almost too detailed from ILSDC side of things, especially where there were options. Perhaps the FGs could play a role here? ILSDC: “did the data come over the way you expected it to?” then FGs “okay and does that work for us?” These recommendations are for each campus to take back and do as a checklist. ILSDC will mostly be done with this doc by Aug 7th
Patron Data: if we create a single document for “migration validation” that would be great. We’re happy to add what we have to this doc. patron, charge, reserves, may be other tabs. PDS could confirm by August 17th. Can we add and delete our tab with freedom? YES PDS can own this step.
FGs could also add some tabs to this doc - with the idea that local campus testers will do this work. FG deliverable: List of accounts and roles / permissions needed. Can we just have all testers (Cohort and Local) have admin-level permissions? It seems like a great idea to simplify permissions overall. Would that cause any unintended consequences? What are we trying to confirm in the vanguard?
Scope of this doc: Data review and Migration validation! Alma/Primo ICs came up with a list of helpful test docs as well: Alma campus IC recommendations for Data Testing
Question: Where do other kinds of testing live? What artifact would be the best for that? | Config form guidelines: ILSDC Aug 14th PDS Aug 17th PPC Aug 21st
PDS wil take patron data tab PPC will make notes on any tabs as necessary, then after Aug 17th PPC will own it. | |
| 7 | Decision pages: Taxonomy for tagging groups in Confluence and more Sample blank decision page for reference | Introduce taxonomy and best practices documents. Ask PPC to edit as needed. Actions from 7/14 SILS Chairs meeting: PMs to consider working with chairs on a best practices page for decisions. PMs to investigate Question: will the decision status get updated automatically in rollups and will you get notified? PMs to work with PPC to investigate how we could make an authoritative set of tags (labels) for each group, and create decision rollups for each group to monitor decisions where they are consulted. (see Josephine’s example rollup and labels). Consider using names from abbreviation glossary. (Do groups want PMs to do this for them?) (from premortem) Groups should use a stakeholder inventory to ensure all voices are heard in decision-making. Add “Assessment” to Decision pages.
| 3:40-3:50 (10 mins) | Lena, All | Taxonomy: Group agreed it would be a good idea to have a canonical list of acronyms / tags. Perhaps once this is approved, we can add the canonical acronym to our Confluence home page, e.g., Policy and Practice Coordinators (PPC)? Change to taxonomy to a Confluence page once approved
Best Practices: group can take a look this week and suggest changes to the best practices by next meeting. Rollups: Once we tag the people who are being consulted - do you want the PMs to create one for everyone? To be determined later. | | |
| 8 | Homework | | | | Liz M will follow up with Basecamp about order of NZ loading confusion with UCSB | | |
| 9 | Parking Lot | | | | | | - Caitlin Nelson to ask for these special topics from Marci on 7/30slack the ICs and SILS Chairs about the shared vendor and data lock-in special topics.
|
| 10 | | TOTAL | 80 / 90 | | | | |