Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata
Attendees
Not attending
Discussion items
| Item | Desired Outcome | Time | Who | Notes | Decisions | Actions |
|---|
| 1 | Check-in / updates | Information sharing and problem-solving | 15 | All | DCFG: We’re working on a timeline to take us to the end of Phase 4. AEFG: E-Resources updates, including discussion of Factiva item. MVP items: proxy use - some discussion mostly local responses; licensing - preliminary discussion of terms; Analytics-related pending with likely hand-off post-Phase 4. Had first post mortem discussion. No meeting 9/8 due to Analytics workshops. DFG: Recommendations for Primo VE Configuration page: when something is not available, recommending that “available in institution” be changed to “check availability” Should page be relabeled? If config recommendations are current, page can be relabeled to “production”. Does this need PPC approval? No need for approval since it was approved before. Ok to share with ICs? Yes. Also, UCSC developed javascript to name UC libraries and put them in alphabetical order. Would like to recommend that campuses use this javascript as well. Yes, add this as a recommendation and tag with “production”. RMFG: held a post-mortem on Tuesday that went really well; starting to schedule out the rest of our MVP items, a few have actually fallen off/moved into other groups (reporting problems, requesting NZ stuff, etc.). CDL has started removing 856 fields from NZ records; Liz and Gem loaded some MARCIVE records into the sandbox for feedback before we start in production | | |
| 2 | E-inventory | from the case of Factiva, but bringing up process- and communication-type issues. AEFG discussed the e-inventory aspects of managing the collection and portfolios, and has a recommendation for this particular resource. There could be similar resources that either 1) may need the same approach and/or 2) may need wider consultation than just within e-inventory management (i.e., back-end). | 15 | Lisa | Background: Factiva has separate URLs for each campus. We’ve historically used a “choose your campus” page as a go-between for access. Here’s the Factiva page, the URL of which was historically in the database-level MARC record: https://cdlib.org/services/info-services/factiva/ . [This page is in the process of being updated.] Factiva has moved from a Tier 2 to a Tier 1. All campuses should have received a welcome letter from ProQuest with their campus-specific URL and account information. [I have these so if you didn’t get it or don’t know who it went to, let me know and I can send to you.]
AEFG recommends: NZ unsuppresses the Collection record, activates Portfolios as appropriate, and in the Level URL (override) field we will place the “choose URL” page linked above, where each campus will be listed with its URL. Pro: This point of access is what campuses/users are used to. Con: This is an extra step to gaining access; could be seen as a barrier to some users. Suggestion: change the word “barrier” to “extra step”
Is there a way to create an approach that addresses e-resources which may not fall into the norm (like Factiva)? Would we need an advisory group to discuss this? AEFG to make this a recommendation to the new groups in their handoff. What does discovery behavior look like with the AEFG recommendation above? AEFG did some limited testing. More testing is needed to provide feedback to CDL. CDL should directly contact relevant FGs to consult rather than go through PPC.
| | |
| 3 | Phase 4 handoff | Determine timetable and process for PPC’s completion of Phase 4 handoff template. | 15 | Xiaoli | Phase 4 Handoff Part 1 is complete The work handoff sheet should only include any work that is unfinished Part 2: There may not be much for PPC Part 3: we will address in Nov, possibly before Thanksgiving
| | |
| 4 | Analytics subgroup | Are there areas that need best practices or policies now? | 15 | Xiaoli, Lisa, Claudia | SILS Steering reviewed the draft charge The group writing the charge decided, after careful consideration, not to set this group up now. Most libraries are still in the process of cleaning data Without clean data, analytics are not useful Staff are currently overloaded with tasks and the bandwidth to serve on a group may be limited right now
The group is therefore recommending that PPC continue working on issues as they arise, but will ultimately make recommendations to the new gov structure. Also there is currently a process in place to request a report from CDL. Acknowledging that many stakeholders exist outside of the cohort. Communicating out processes that are in place is essential. Claudia, Lisa and Xiaoli will author a SILS News that will be sent out the week of 9/13. PPC members can also be ambassadors letting staff know that PPC is addressing this. Stay tuned! We also talked about nothing precluding others in UC from putting forward a related CKG proposal...
| | |
| 5 | PM Update | Awareness of what’s happening / coming soon in the project | 5 | Christine | Upcoming Scheduled Meetings: Mon, Sep 6: NO MEETING - Labor Day Mon, Sep 6 - Fri, Sep 10: No regular weekly meetings -due to holiday and Analytics Workshop Tue, Sep 7 - Fri, Sep 10: Analytics Workshop Mon, Sep 13: Project Meeting - Sep 13 (includes update #1 of STS Readiness forms)
| | |
| 6 | Homework | | | | | | |
| 7 | Parking Lot | | | | Future meeting: and... how the Selector role in Alma is changing (on list since early in project, from 8/25 AEFG is starting to review a little...) SILS Ops (CDL) support of Automated Fulfillment Network (AFN)- Build a better understand the AFN needs of campuses, and the ability of CDL to support those needs
| | |
| 8 | | TOTAL | 60/90 | | | | |
Future agenda items