Date
, 10am-11:30am
...
Discussion items
DISCOVERY VISION: We strive to design and implement the best possible discovery and delivery experience for our end users using data-driven decision making. We envision a network zone experience that will allow users to discover library materials across UC collections without sacrificing relevant results. As such, the default search and results interface should prioritize the success of typical users while providing additional functionality for more advanced users.
Item | Desired Outcome | Time | Who | Notes | Decisions | Actions | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | New items on our Confluence page | Describe what the new items are for | 10 min | Josephine | Link to Vanguard Testing Notes on Discovery Confluence Functionality Testing Page. | Bookmark VE instance URL in browser (Slack not a reliable archive); add to Confluence page if not already linked | |
2 | Updates from other SILS groups | Share relevant items | 15 min | Josephine Sarah Sarah Jess and Josephine attended Archives & Special Collections Escalation Leaders group mtg last Thursday. | The campuses are not testing AEON in this first stage of VG testing. From Chizu re: AEON: “our backend configurations are still in place for AEON (on the Alma side), but the link doesn't appear. I've created a basecamp message for this ("[UCSB] General Electronic Service (AEON) not appearing in Primo.” They will let us know if there are specific things they would like us to look out for related to archives and special collections. We will give them a heads up if we need their advice on any decisions related to archives and special collections. | 3rd party integration not in the scope of Vanguard testing CDL has an 3rd party campus wide inventory; ExL can integrate all, a few may require extra work.SH |
|
3 | Vanguard Buddies | Offer feedback and suggestions | 15 min | All | Jess and Josephine met for first VG buddy functionality testing today.
| Future discussion: Could rename scope, (for expi.e.) Everything@UCSF EAEllen: campus may turn on items campus does not have access to, but what campus would like to expose users to; UCI renamed scope to “almost everything” MYMichael: discovery tool vs. access tool | |
4 | Functionality Testing | Discuss how VGs will be testing Discovery assigned tasks | 15 min | All |
| The URL for these pages can be used to linked to in Column J - “Testing Notes” - of the Discovery tab of Testing Worksheet for PPC. | |
5 | Discovery Work Flow Plan Roadmap | Evaluate timeline for more accurate dates | 15 min | All | Work Flow Plan link on our Discovery Confluence homepage. Also reference SILS Project timeline and milestones MY: concern about overlap between End User & Outreach group
CM: who is ultimately responsible with testing?
| JWJess: Which of these on the workflow plan do we want to prioritize for harmonization? And, for those items, decide on labels- what should we call it?
|
Ask ExL again about system architecture documentation (need someone to contact ExL) |
6 | Resource Management FG’s Local 856 data Decision Page | Discuss | 20 min | All |
“RMFG will consult with the Discovery FG to test the statement below that “existing 856 fields will not populate into Primo” since current experience with Primo at some Alma campuses varies. In addition whether those fields wind up in Primo will affect specific 856 data like finding aid links, etc.” “Questions to consider:
| AE: need to rephrase this question about existing 856 for clarification
Current 856 data may not migrate over properly Current decision page specifically for Vanguard- need Discovery FG to help refine this page, so that it can be carried over JW: UCSC: What data is in the 856 field that may impact end users- finding aid links (are willing to experiment with portfolios) JC: UCD also discussed portfolios for findings aids; doing cleanup first (discussion ongoing) EA: suggested looking at documentation for P2E | JT created document for 856 feedback - add local feedback here within this week (want to have recommendation decided during next week’s meeting) |
7 | Homework | Prepares team for next meeting | All |
| |||
8 | Parking Lot/Q&A | Save these issues for future discussion & comments |
|
|
|
|
Our feedback needed to provide for the RMFG’s Decisions
Decision Page | Priority vote (1-3) | Consulting group feedback due |
1 | 10/7 | |
1 | 10/13 | |
1 | 10/13 | |
1 | 10/21 | |
1 | 10/21 |
...