2021-04-06 Meeting notes

Date

Apr 6, 2021, 10am-11:30am

Attendees

Ellen Augustiniak, UC Irvine [Today’s Notetaker]
Jared Campbell, UC Davis
Chizu Morihara, UC Santa Barbara
Sharon Shafer, UC Los Angeles
Heather Smedberg, UC San Diego
Josephine Tan, UC San Francisco (co-chair)
Jess Waggoner, UC Santa Cruz (co-chair) [Today’s Timekeeper]
Michael Yonezawa, UC Riverside

Not attending

Sarah Houghton, California Digital Library
Lisa Ngo, UC Berkeley
Elizabeth Salmon, UC Merced

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

	Item	Desired Outcome	Time	Who	Notes	Decisions	Actions
1	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		@Jess Waggoner will share document re: CDI by Apr 9, 2021 @Jess Waggoner will continue using SC testers for CDI exploration and share by Apr 12, 2021
2	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.	@Heather Smedberg (Unlicensed) will write up with @Sharon Shafer (Unlicensed) document with background and tasks to pass off to PPC by Apr 9, 2021
3	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: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1W58ZXAKybOhzJEocrYXSUndscFwYtglInKk4U0yncg0/edit#responses	Wait for next week b/c there are people are missing.	@Sharon Shafer (Unlicensed) will check to see if LA can rush through testing a bit more by Apr 8, 2021
4	Revised branding decision for Go Live	Discuss and move toward a decision	30 min	All	https://uc-sils.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/DF/pages/601096428 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.	@Jess Waggoner will draft up decision for next meeting on Apr 13, 2021
5	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?
6	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.
7	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