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 3 Next »

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

  • Michael Yonezawa, UC Riverside

  • Heather Smedberg, UC San Diego [Today’s Notetaker]

  • 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

Updates from other SILS groups

Share relevant items

15 min

Josephine

Sarah

2

Vanguard Buddies Check-in

Offer feedback and suggestions

15 min

All

3

Discovery UX Evaluation Sub-Groups & Process

Discuss our work moving forward for Discovery UX

30 min

All

Document at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cHYtmC4K6hWcwLlUqCVMW-08sg0hZ2QFyIvrA7k4hzo/edit?usp=sharing .

4

Primo VE naming & logo

Look at examples of Primo VEs named “Library Search”

15 min

Josephine

There is a Primo VE Branding Examples document on our Discussions page and in the Branding folder of our Google Drive.

5

Check-in: Consulting on RMFG’s next Decision Pages


See how VG feedback is going

15 min

All

Questions from RMFG:

"We did have one more question about 852 notes, which are notes in the call number fields for holdings. I’ll try to find an example for you but generally should they be displayed?

For local RLF records: we’re just wondering how confusing it is for resources where the loanable copy is at an RLF but there is a record at the home campus as well. For example a title search for “the hollow needle” will bring up an SRLF copy and a UCSD copy, but the UCSD copy *is* the RLF copy, we just added our bib to Alma because it’s higher quality. We might still need to send the records through migration but it’s good to know if there are issues that need to be addressed right after migration."

Discovery feedback will help them with their two decisions:

  1. Bibliographic records to leave out of the Vanguard NZ

  2. Vanguard local RLF migration

See our feedback consultation notes.

In general to keep in mind for RMFG:

  • Are there any fields/facets that are not showing up in Primo that should?

  • Are there any impacts on Primo due to campuses migrating their data differently that are critical to resolve before test load?

6

Homework

Prepares team for next meeting

All

7

Parking Lot/Q&A

Save these issues for future discussion & comments

 

 

 

 
Our feedback needed to provide for the RMFG’s Decisions

 

  • No labels