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 5 Current »

Date

, 10am-11:30am

Attendees

  • Lisa Ngo, UC Berkeley

  • Jared Campbell, UC Davis

  • Ellen Augustiniak, UC Irvine

  • Sharon Shafer, UC Los Angeles

  • Elizabeth Salmon, UC Merced [Today’s Notetaker]

  • Michael Yonezawa, UC Riverside

  • Heather Smedberg, UC San Diego

  • Josephine Tan, UC San Francisco (co-chair) [Today’s Timekeeper]

  • Jess Waggoner, UC Santa Cruz (co-chair)

  • Sarah Houghton, California Digital Library

  • Chizu Morihara, UC Santa Barbara

Not attending

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 will look into sharing the 3rd party integrations spreadsheet.

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, (for exp) Everything@UCSF

EA: 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”

MY: 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

  • Jess & Josephine are meeting later today with End User Outreach and Fulfillment to discuss workflows, decision points, communications

CM: who is ultimately responsible with testing?

  • We will work hand in hand with local implementation groups; timeline feels out of sync- likely happening at many Vanguard campuses

  • SH: currently in the test for the test; ironing out wrinkles now; figuring out roles and responsibilities that will likely roll over the next phase

  • SS: need to explain what all the scopes are doing

  • Ask ExL again about system architecture documentation

  • Desire for more clarification where data lives and how it is connected

JW: 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?

  • When do local groups need to know this? November-December. Implementation kickoff- November 5th.

  • Prioritize what will impact end users the most- not extremely granular- esp. in light of timeline; conversations will continue to take place long into the future. What needs to be harmonized now, and what possibly can wait.

  • This group should take ownership about what MARC records should appear in the full record

  • -revisit CSU central package/configurations wiki

  • Start with ExL setup/configuration forms

Share any visualizations you have/created with group

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 needs our response by 10/7 to help them complete their Local 856 data Decision Page:

“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:

  1. Some campuses have started moving data already, is it worth creating 1 prescribed field?

  2. Is there any advantage to using a 9XX in a bib over a holdings field?”

AE: need to rephrase this question about existing 856 for clarification

  • JT will clarify

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

 

  • No labels