2021-04-06 Meeting notes

Updates from other SILS groups

Share relevant items

5 min

Jess

PPC/All Chairs:

• RMFG has developed a collaborative workflow testing document that indicates impacted groups - but they will continue to reach out directly when seeking consultation

• Who will name automated fulfillment network? Decided this was Discovery’s role. Basically this applies to labeling of “Resource Sharing” within Primo UI

• Concerns about workload implications if we go with Fully Flexible CDI

RLF Records

15 min

All

• Fulfillment FG has recommended suppressing local holdings for RLF records

• RMFG is asking DFG:

  • Do you think that users benefit from being able to do these kinds of title-level searches for items that would otherwise only be searchable at the journal/series level?

  • If so, is it preferable for us to suppress our holdings and include some kind of note to direct users to search for the main series for UCSD items? There are times where the item is available at another campus and so they might just as easily get it that way without having to request the RLF copy.

Disco FG will document concerns. E.g.

• Concern: search. Loss of rich, descriptive, granular access e.g. in series item-level cataloging.

• Concern: timing. Is this MVP? Cleanup is an issue. RLF Task group won’t be done with its work until after go-live.

• Concern: backlog. E.g. UCSB “decanted” materials and SRLF is not caught up.

• Concern: user experience & training for MVP. If we don’t suppress, all public services will have to get used to holdings being a little wrong sometimes.

• Concern: special collex. E.g. because even if SD item is at SRLF, researchers have to be in SD to view/use it.

UC-eLinks

Vote on decision

20 min

All

• Mock ups from Graphic Designer

• Vote on new name

• Santa Cruz testing did have some limits - more testing would be beneficial, but we have a time limit

• Concern: ILL. “Get it” feels like an over promise. Because sometimes it takes a bit.

• Irvine feedback via google form: UC-eLinks

Wait for next week b/c there are people are missing.

Revised branding decision for Go Live

Discuss and move toward a decision

30 min

All

• (Vanguard) Primo VE User Interface Branding Elements

• Mock Ups of Wordmark in UI

• Summary of Discussion: Do we need to change anything in VG Decision Page? Or can these decisions go to go live?

  • Are we harmonizing on inclusion of the wordmark?

  • If so, to what degree (eg. flexibility around placement or color?)

• Flexibility is desired.

• Prominent is desirable. E.g. footer does not meet the goal of prominence.

• Other menus and other local design preferences matter. E.g. campuses that eventually want to heavily customize the top menu bars should have flexibility.

• Responsive design matters. Campuses should understand how logos display on phones etc. E.g. Cal State Fullerton’s Primo does not show OneSearch logo on a phone.

Check Ins

Discuss updates/problems/testing

15 min

All

Opportunity to check in on local implementation:

• Worldcat

• Boosting

• Other

• Journals search. SD can’t pinpoint causes, but there are issues that are getting attention from many departments.

• Resource type. UCLA - collections?

Next Meeting

Prep for next meeting

• Branding decision vote?

• Follow up on sub-group work

• FRBR. Update from Jess: RMFG will handle. No need for formal decision page.

Parking Lot/Q&A

Save these issues for future discussion & comments

• FRBR

• Boosting

• Main Menu (pull up config workbooks)

• Facets

• Libguides

• Testing plan

• Delivery and Fulfillment

• Minimum Viable Product

• WorldCat

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

• UC-eLinks (re)naming

• What will help links be called and where will they be in the interface?

Questions/comments:

• SFX Journal Search Tool (moved notes to UC eLinks section)

• Third party integrations

  • Browzine & LibKey

• Ebook ILL lending: problematic with Melvyl; keep in mind to test in Test phase