| Item | Desired Outcome | Time | Who | Notes | Decisions | Actions |
---|
1 | Updates - from All-Chairs, Leadership Group, etc. | | 15 6 mins | Tom | | | |
2 | Q & A Session - Including Questions on Slack since last meeting | | 10 2 mins | Team | | | |
3 | Topics or questions for the Ex Libris Support Meeting | | 15 mins | Team | 17 mins | Team | Made it known to ExL that we would like everyone in OT to have consortial account access so we can see each other’s tickets Waiting to hear back about this, but expressed our wishes There will be a training and introduction session on this role After Alon gets in touch with the person who will be handling this training (Esther), OT-SC might have everyone join them on Sept. 28 to do some training on consortial account use Hopefully everyone can attend, but if not the group will record the training session and make it available to folks Tom thinks this is the time that the training will happen, but hasn’t been confirmed by ExL yet
There is a possibility that the training will have to happen at our normal meeting time, but we won’t know that until Alon gets in touch with Esther; more info to come
CJK indexing issue Asked ExL to provide us with documentation about how long it took in the previous reindexing, so we have a benchmark we can look at, and so we know what to expect if we decide to do the CJK reindexing ExL is fully confident that there shouldn’t be an issue We should probably hold-off until we have the documentation, so we know what to expect
Next annual reindexing is in November; recommendation was maybe we allow the CJK change, so we can do the normal reindexing in November What does everyone think of this? This would be to include more of the characters, but still wouldn’t be able to have Cyrillic; progress, but not everything that we want Concern about taking down user records; this hasn’t happened with reindexing before and is likely because the test happened in the sandbox
As part of Ex Libris' Support Response and Time to Resolve Initiative (Project Flash): they will be following up on a number of backlogged cases Many will have status or ownership changes as part of this initiative Alon has provided a list of the tickets that are on this case review list: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QMm9HrDHymh39ezrtr_iXIxpih8MZwCR/edit#gid=1493230397 Goal is to be more responsive, and part of that is getting rid of their backlog Deprecation of two statuses: “pending workplan” (this means super low development priority, with two years to appeal) - ExL will close these now If a ticket of yours gets closed, and you need to keep it documented, comment on the ticket to ask that it is cloned Goal is to have things not linger in development Might not get immediate answers, but at least there will be communication
Tom recommends that folks respond with “I’m still looking into it,” to ensure our tickets aren’t closed while we’re waiting to test something or further look into something Some cases that were in pending development, or some other languishing status, will not be under individual analysts ExL also talked about not having their tier 2 analysts going down rabbit holes as much ExL said this is starting to happen now-ish Spreadsheet is there for everyone to look at; no immediate action item, but something to be aware of and keep an eye on
| | |
4 | Project Team and Working Groups Check-In - September 2022 | | 20 12 mins | Tom / Team | Open Access Resource Management Project Team Check-In CDL Shared Collections in the NZ Project Team Check-In Need more specificity on what they’re working on We need to find out more about where the misunderstanding is occurring regarding the scope of this group OT Member knows someone on this group from their home campus, and they’re hoping there will be an outcome of creating this document; looking for help We should ask them to be more specific and provide more clarity, so we can help them better Seems like this group is feeling overloaded, and needs our help
Understanding which ExL tickets belong to this group, would help with OT-SC bringing up the tickets in the regular support meetings with ExL We can take back to this group that the LG is looking into creating a small group/project team to look into analytics LG is on top of the communication concern - will be directly addressed at the upcoming Town Hall Part of what this group is highlighting is that there are people on campuses who aren’t a part of SILS, and not having these key people in the SILS meetings makes it difficult Best thing that OT can do is:
RLF Configuration Project Team Check-In
| | |
5 | Anonymization Rules timing (RS OST) | Discuss and provide feedback by Sept. 30th | 23 mins | Tom / Team | Timing of anonymization rules in order to capture AFN digitization analytic reports They believe this is of interest to the OT because the task of changing the appropriate anonymization rules would likely fall to this group Requesting that the feedback be placed as comments to the decision page or via email to the group at sils-rs-l@ucop.edu Everyone in OT should review the document and add their notes/comments/questions as in-line comments by Sept. 30, 2022 Can also continue this conversation on our OT Slack Might be best for OT folks to clarify with their counterpart on the Resource Sharing Group, to see if they have any concerns around local issues ULs will be relying on us to give them information about the decision
Sarah says CSUs are not using the AFN
Two main concerns: The goal is to be able to delay the anonymize resource sharing requests without affecting the anonymize item loans Next steps:
| | - Sarah Lindsey will reach out to Brandon at the CSUs to confirm whether CSUs are using the AFN
|
6 | Executive Session | Private discussion as needed | | | | | |
67 | Parking Lot | Capture important topics for future discussion | | | | | |
78 | | Total | 60 mins | | | | |