Exclude IZ Only records from Discovery Network

See Best Practices for Decision Pages and Tags for groups

Legend: not started IN PROGRESS STALLED decided

Status	IN PROGRESS
Description	The presence of records from another campus that cannot be obtained via interampus sharing or Aeon request can create a negative user experience for users. Such records should be marked for exclusion from the Discovery Network. In order to successfully exclude marked records, campuses will need to adjust their search profile configurations.
Decision summary
Owning group	Discovery Operations
Approver	Final decider; group with the authority to approve the decision. Unless multiple groups are affected or additional staffing or finances are required, your group can approve its own decisions.
Consulted	Groups or individuals who need to be consulted before the decision can be made. Groups or individuals who contribute to this decision.
Informed	Groups/individuals who need to know about this decision. For broad-reaching decisions, SILS has a cohort-wide email list (SILS-Cohort-L@ucop.edu) and slack channel for all SILS members #all-cohort. SILS News email list reaches ~500 self-subscribed UC staff (SILS-News-L@ucop.edu)
Decision-making process	Describe the process your group will use to make the decision.
Priority	Describe the priority: High, medium, low, etc.
Target decision date	[type // to add Date] The date your group aims to make the decision. Allow time for consulting.
Date decided	[type // to add Date] You must add a date field for it to sort properly. It will not sort if you simply type the date. The date the Approver approves the decision.

Recommendation

Describe the final recommendation/decision.

Impact

Stakeholder group	Impact

Stakeholder group	Impact
Who does this decision affect? [name of the group]	Explain the significance of the decision to EACH stakeholder group. How will this decision impact this particular group? What will change? Do they need to take any action? If so, when?

Reasoning

Background

(Go Live) Exclude Records from Discovery Network

Phase 4 determined that it was beneficial to exclude certain records from the Discovery Network. However, Ex Libris does not have this capability built in and the workaround is to add specific text in a standard MARC field because the NZ cannot “see” local fields.

Because this field would likely be displayed to users, a normalization rule is needed.

If the 520 is used, as suggested by Phase 4, then the normalization rule needs to check for the existence of the text in the 520 and only create a display when the text is not there.

( something like…

when
MARC is “520”.”a” AND NOT
MARC.”520”.”a” match “Exclude from discovery network”
then
do the things)

Options Considered [remove if not needed]

	Option 1	Option 2

	Option 1	Option 2
Description
Pros
Cons

Dependencies

Questions to consider

Action Log

Action/Point Person	Expected Completion Date	Notes	Status

Action/Point Person	Expected Completion Date	Notes	Status