2021-11-09 Meeting notes
Date
Nov 9, 2021, 10am-11:30am
Attendees
Lisa Ngo, UC Berkeley
Jared Campbell, UC Davis
Sharon Shafer, UC Los Angeles
Elizabeth Salmon, UC Merced
Michael Yonezawa, UC Riverside [Today’s Notetaker]
Heather Smedberg, UC San Diego
Josephine Tan, UC San Francisco (co-chair) [Today’s Timekeeper]
Chizu Morihara, UC Santa Barbara
Jess Waggoner, UC Santa Cruz (co-chair)
Sarah Houghton, California Digital Library
Not attending
Sean Claudio, UC Irvine
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 |
|
| All |
|
| Josephine is creating a document in appropriate Google document. |
| 2 | Finalize Restrict Resource Sharing Restriction Rules by Location decision |
|
| All | Discuss Xiaoli’s response DFG have recommendation to hold off on implementing until further investigation Potential implications for NZ - is this something we should harmonize on?
Special Collections - to restrict Request and suppress links; but item level records are necessary for many services such as Aeon, but also for other types of restrictions and solutions related to this decision. Each campus need to thinking carefully about restricting location. Concerns about what this does to the workflow? Also, will there be additional burdens on campuses which own an item and is willing to lend when another campus which owns the same item restricts it. [this already happens at a fair amount but no actual statistics to support the anecdotal evidence] What is the benefit to suppress requests with respect to the User Experience? Make the reasoning as clear as possible in the Decision page. Terms of Use with Locations to determine suppressing links for local items might be possible. But there are not actually connected and might require an enhancement by ExLibris. One area to experiement with is changing what text users see when no Resource Sharing options are available. (i.g., “No services available” in box see screenshot above) This is editable at the local level in the label table. Including putting in links. | Recommendation is to have a local designated individual(s) to have the local authority to submit restriction rules? Talk with colleagues at local campues regarding the membership in these new SLIS governance group - ALL | Revisit next week. Also include recommendation text on the harmonization recommendations. Jess will update the recommendation page for next week’s meeting. Add recommendation on how to change and add different text/links when no Resource Sharing services appears to this Decision page. (also add to harmonization configuration page as well). |
| 3 | Exclude eBooks from CDI results (Primo VE Nov Release note) |
|
| Jess | Discuss Xiaoli’s response DFG have recommendation to hold off on implementing until further investigation Potential implications for NZ - is this something we should harmonize on? |
|
|
| 4 | Headings Enrichment / Authority Record setting |
|
| All | ExLibris Documentation on Headings Enrichment Most all have campuses have authority record setting set as false Update on Jared’s Salesforce ticket | Let PPC know what ExL said; we checked with our campuses to see what their authority settings are and all have set to false. |
|
| 5 | Make the 930 Field Searchable in Primo | Finalize decision to move forward to consulting groups |
| Jess/Jared | https://uc-sils.atlassian.net/l/c/LPGJ8evU The how-to is by Jared; The why-to is by Discovery FG Jared created a few example records rather than reindexing the entire sandbox (requires a salesforce ticket). This would create it’s own local searchable index field. Need to clarify in decision page to not imply that it will include the “title” field when searching for a database or package. NOTE: Jared mentioned that if you use the 930 field for local notes Dedup will default to another record and not the one that has information in 930 field. |
| Ready to send to RMFG, AEFG |
| 6 | Access Model notes |
|
|
| Access Model field will cause a note to display in Primo that tells users whether or not an item is limited to number of users; we’ll let CDL know how important this is for the local campuses. Potential topic to hand off to the next group to investigate. ExLibris has an Access Model field that can be displayed to users. What kind of example wording exists already in the records? Is there a list. Access Model field in the Portfolio and ACQ tab > 4th field. See https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FLs0fVdeGvwHtmhMvvauRihfqn4347APnwif6pYFj_8/edit |
| @Jared Campbell Set up collection for ebooks/ejournal package to test turning on this feature. |
| 7 | Check Ins | Discuss updates/problems/testing |
| All | Elizabeth - noticed duplicates in results; will send a Slack message. FRBR / Dedup - NOTE: Jared mentioned that if you use the 930 field for local notes Dedup will default to another record and not the one that has information in 930 field. Heather - Deduping question regarding a newspaper being mixed up with another publication. Searching for ways to break Deduping in necessary situations. |
|
|
| 8 | Next Meeting | Prep for next meeting |
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 | Parking Lot/Q&A | Save these issues for future discussion & comments |
|
|
Questions/comments:
|
|
|
The SILS mission is to transform library services and operations through innovation and collaboration. The future is shared!
Question? Contact AskSILS-L@ucop.edu