Atlassian uses cookies to improve your browsing experience, perform analytics and research, and conduct advertising. Accept all cookies to indicate that you agree to our use of cookies on your device.
Atlassian uses cookies to improve your browsing experience, perform analytics and research, and conduct advertising. Accept all cookies to indicate that you agree to our use of cookies on your device. Atlassian cookies and tracking notice, (opens new window)
ExL followed up on non-filing 880 bug. They will release this “enhancement” no later than May 2026. Definitely for VE, we’ll test NDE as well.
November release notes: rules for hiding local resources from a network. Might resolve long-standing problems. UCSC and UCB are looking at using this to hide equipment. UCR is interested and can help test.
Also November release notes: enhanced DEI controls. Maybe allows for replacement of terms rather than hiding them? Did inclusive metadata team ever create a list? UCB wants to test and share with their local group.
Zoe will add to workplan: show and tell on new feature and contents of lists.
Future meeting topic: sightimprove or google analytics? Who is using? Can we bring in experts (UCLA)?
LG will create a project team involving Digital Collections experts. Discovery will plan to contribute members (Jen and Zoe volunteered). Zoe created page for initial notes, brainstorming, and planning from the Discovery side: https://uc-sils.atlassian.net/wiki/x/BYBIz
2
LG: Digital Collections campus reports
Discuss with LG representative:feasibility and timeline for producing campus reports, and any questions we have for them.
30
In 2022, SILS Digital Collections Project Team produced a report on digital collection status. Now, we want “a status report across campuses: what choices have been made, how effective they’ve been, what challenges or trade-offs have arisen, and what might be promising practices to share.”
Overview / Scope
Which digital collections the campus considers for exposure in the campus discovery system (e.g. institutional repository, digital library, special collections, research data, web archives).
Whether exposure is comprehensive (i.e. everything ingested) or selective (only particular collections, formats, or “featured” subsets).
Technical / Metadata Strategy
What metadata mappings, level of description (collection vs. item) and linking approaches are used to integrate digital objects into the discovery environment.
Whether these digital collection records are integrated with “regular” catalog records in Alma, or presented in a separate cluster / facet / “digital collection” or “featured collections” view.
Are these collections cataloged in MARC, taken from the Central Discovery Index (CDI), harvested, etc.?
How do you handle duplication of records?
How identifiers or linking (e.g. PURL, DOI, repository linkbacks) are handled (i.e. from discovery result to the actual digital object).
User Interface / UX Decisions
How digital collections are surfaced in the UI (e.g. special browse facets, separate “collections” tabs, “digital” labels, etc.).
Whether there are mechanisms for “featured collections,” curated displays, or spotlighting within discovery.
Any user interface trade-offs or constraints encountered (e.g. performance, filtering, relevance, display clutter).
How often the campus harvests or catalogs new digital content (frequency, triggers).
How updates, deletions, versioning, provenance, or link rot are handled.
Any challenges in coordinating with source systems (repositories, archives, data platforms) for metadata consistency or technical compatibility.
Metrics, Monitoring & User Feedback
What metrics or analytics you track to assess the visibility, use, or success of digital collections in discovery (e.g. search impressions, clicks, full view usage).
Any user feedback or usability testing outcomes relevant to the integration of digital collections.
Challenges, Trade-offs, and Lessons Learned
What are the biggest technical, policy, metadata, or organizational challenges you have faced.
What decisions or compromises did you have to make (e.g. limiting scope, simplifying mappings, delaying refreshes).
What strategies or solutions have worked well (or not).
Opportunities for Coordination / Best Practices
Are there areas where a shared SILS-level guideline, tool, or service might help (e.g. metadata crosswalks, harvesting pipelines, shared UI components)?
What features or enhancements would you like to see in Primo VE (or the discovery infrastructure) to better support digital collections.
Next Steps / Aspirations
What you hope to do going forward (plans, pilot experiments, roadmap).
What support or collaboration you would like from SILS or other campuses.
Previous work by Digital Collections Project Team and Final Report:
Is LG looking for information on only digital collections exposed in Primo, or all digital collections with a “discovery system” across the UCs?
We’re mostly interested in Primo! This group can advise on technical aspects of this. Digital collections experts can provide more of the “why” certain collections are/aren’t included.
The original report contains a “pre-assessment questionnaire”. Was this ever sent out to campuses? Could we use a similar approach to collect and deliver info to LG?
This was never sent, but could be adapted and sent out by new project team.
What about Calisphere?
What about the CDI? How are things getting there?
3
Slack/General Questions
5
UCB is seeing strange Analytics results - many more basic searches for FY23-24 than previously reported.
Nothing useful from Support. Adding notes to records for now.
UCR also saw something similar 2023 - one extreme spike of traffic from China.
UCB wants feedback on suppress dedup. Please check with your campuses.