Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 19 Next »

Legend: NOT STARTED IN PROGRESS STALLED DECIDED

Status

IN PROGRESS

Scope

IMPLEMENTATION

Description

Decide how to handle WorldCat scope. Harmonize? If so, how?

Decision

Discovery FG recommends not harmonizing on Worldcat integration. We outline below three recommended approaches to integration from which campuses should choose according to their user needs.

Owning group

Discovery FG Josephine Tan and Jess Waggoner, co-chairs

Approver

Discovery FG

Stakeholders

R = Discovery FG
A = Discovery FG
C = CDL, Resource Management FG, Fulfillment FG
I = EUOS, Local Stakeholders

Decision-making process

  1. Review options

  2. Consult with SILS and local stakeholders

Priority

Mandatory before Go-live

Due date

June 8, 2021

Recommendations

Campuses will select the Worldcat/Primo integration most appropriate for their campus user needs. The following are recommended approaches to integration:

1. Display Worldcat materials within Primo via a separate search profile

Access using this option:

Worldcat items can be requested directly from Primo. From the end-user perspective, the request process for these materials will appear identical to the request process for UC materials.

Pros:

  • Users are not forced to leave UC Library Search to discover materials

  • The Request process for Worldcat materials will be intuitive and familiar

Cons:

  • Users cannot facet Worldcat items (though Advanced Search will still work)

  • Every item status in the brief results is “Check Availability” - even items we own at UCSC; for items we own, the complete holdings will appear once the user clicks into the full record display

  • Users cannot see which libraries outside of UC have holdings for the item

  • Inclusion of certain symbols within the query term appear to be incompatible (specifically “-” and “#”)

2. Provide link(s) out to Worldcat from the Primo interface

Access using this option:

Worldcat items will need to be requested via “Get it at UC” link within the Worldcat interface. Clicking the Get it at UC button will direct the user to our Primo through an OpenURL where they can make their request via the Request through Interlibrary Loan link.

Pros:

  • Users can utilize the robust faceting capabilities of Worldcat

  • Users can quickly see list of libraries that have holdings for the item

Cons:

  • Users must navigate out to a separate system to discover materials

  • Using UC-eLinks to request materials may be less intuitive to new users (and, depending upon which Worldcat we send users to, could require VPN/Proxy to see the “Get it at UC” button)

3. Provide both link(s) out to Worldcat and create a separate search profile

Reasoning

Each approach has pros and cons. Campuses should consult with local stakeholders (eg. instruction, reference, and interlibrary loan departments) to determine which approach best fits their needs.

Environmental Scan

Example libraries:

Background

  • Melvyl-like functionality for ILL is a desired feature - especially for books not held in the UC system.

  • WorldCat results can be “blended” with other results; however, it doesn’t work as smoothly as we’d like and ExLibris recommends against this option.

Dependencies

  • Work with Fulfillment FG and CDL to ensure all options are viable

  • Adequate time for any implementation work and testing required by CDL

  • Adequate time for implementation work and testing required by local teams

Questions to consider

  • User needs. How much will our researchers appreciate the ability to start an ILL directly from the Primo interface?

  • Common use scenarios. How do our researchers use Worldcat searching, and how well are they supported by including a separate Worldcat scope versus a link out to Worldcat?

    • Example scenario: Worldcat (on campuses that do not use WC Discovery) is used frequently by more advanced researchers looking for a known item that’s not available on their campus. So, for example, a search for older, more unique monographs.

  • Quality of WorldCat-only search scope. Primo’s search functions for WorldCat data are significantly worse than WorldCat for precision searches.

  • Quality of blended search. How well does it work?

    • Results are worse with WorldCat. ExLibris strongly discourages using WorldCat records in default search. Default search ends up the most-used search, and including WorldCat records sort of breaks the facet display because it hides number of results in the facets.
      (From experience, the format of a highlighted “Note” field in Ex Libris documentation is deceptive. It looks mild, with subtle yellow highlighting, but in reality it means ALARM.)

Action Log

Action/Point Person

Expected Completion Date

Notes

Status

Each Disco FG member: get feedback from local group on WorldCat search profile

Jan 15, 2021

complete

Disco FG: perform environmental scan that 1. reviews choice (separate, blended, neither and point to WorldCat) and 2. reviews functionality

Complete

Disco FG: confirm common use scenarios

  1. WorldCat in search profile scope: UCSD, UCSC, UCSF

  2. WorldCat only in Advanced search: UCB, UCSB

  3. WorldCat icon in results facet (Northwestern model seems to be 1 +3 ;and UCSF may do this)

Complete

Discovery FG finalizes recommendations

June 8, 2021

  • No labels