2020-12-08 Meeting notes

Updates from other SILS groups & project timeline

Share relevant items

10 min

Josephine

Sarah

PPC: has drafted a Minimum Viable Product sheet that FG’s will fill out

Primo VE future support

Begin discussion on who/what group will support Primo VE

15 min

Sarah

There are links in Primo to report problems with records and within the link resolver to get support.

• Where will these links go? To the CDL Help Desk (since we’ve provided Discovery-level support via Melvyl)? To a contact at each campus library (since we have 10 Primo instances)?

• CDL Help Desk staff want to continue to provide support, but not if the campus libraries would prefer that feedback to go to them.

• There is also the question of how much these links are actually used and whether or not it matters. Maybe the existing Alma campuses can help us with that one.

Check-in: UX Testing Subgroup Partnership Work

Discuss any updates

15 min

All

References

• Usability Testing Confluence page

• Configuration Recommendations Workbook

Are there areas where one subgroup’s UX testing may be better suited to be covered by another subgroup? If so, can document them HERE for follow up.

Approach to building towards our final Primo VE configuration recommendations (due by 2/5/21):

1. Look at each of our UX subgroup’s recommendations that relate to where group’s assigned themselves on the Configuration Recommendations Workbook.

2. Define Minimum Viable Product

3. Formulate our recommendations and possibly have something similar to CSU's Configurations recommendations.

Notes from last week’s mtg

Helpful reference for agenda item #3 above

Proposal: based on ExL Setup doc, each subgroup fill in.

Concern: this setup document is so skeletal that it might not provide enough structure.

Guiding principles: Minimum Viable Product.

For recommendations, how do we break them down into what’s possible and who needs to do them?

• ILL did see success in talking through with Fulfillment FG to see if any pain points were clearly “FFG” vs. Discovery.

High and Medium priorities are both candidates for consideration.

Can we have a section or process for recording issues we expect to need to iterate on quickly, even if we don’t have a specific recommendation?

IF

• subgroup recommendation is Discovery’s responsibility (based on discussions with other interested FGs) AND

• subgroup recommendation should be addressed to get to an MVP (high or medium priority)

THEN

Note your recommendation in the appropriate “Area” in a draft recommendation document. “Areas” will start as groupings based on ExL initial configuration document.

If there is no row where an MVP recommendation fits (based on the “areas” in the Initial Setup document) do still include them in a separate section. If there are enough of these, we’ll organize into topics.

End User Name Subgroup

Gather feedback on proposed names

50 min

Jess, Ellen, Elizabeth

Homework

Prepares team for next meeting

All

(Discussion of EUNS interests)

Config form discussion, e.g. Lisa Ngo (Unlicensed) 's concern about languages, which are not configurable and need ExL to enable.

• All: Look at ExL’s Primo VE Customization Best Practices
• All: Take 2 questions back to your local group(s). What should be in the concept of ‘everything’. What should or should not be pre-filtered?

Parking Lot/Q&A

Save these issues for future discussion & comments

• Configuration

• Harmonization customizations

• Defining the “Everything” scope

• Determine plan for MELVYL and Related SILS Services

• Ebook ILL lending as it relates to discovery and limiting to availability.