2020-10-16 Meeting notes

Date

Oct 16, 2020

Zoom link in Outlook Calendar invitation.

Notetaker: @Kevin Balster

Attendees

@Marcia Barrett UC Santa Cruz (Alma/Primo)
@Kevin Balster UC Los Angeles (Voyager)
@Ryan Finnerty UC San Diego (Millennium)
@Kathleen Garvey-Clasby (Unlicensed) California Digital Library/SCP (Millennium)
@Joshua Chaim Hutchinson (Unlicensed) UC Irvine (Alma/Primo)
@TJ Kao UC Davis (co-chair) (Alma/Primo)
@Cathleen Lu UC San Francisco (Millennium)
@Erika Quintana UC Riverside (Alma/Primo)
@Sarah Sheets UC Merced (WMS)
@Eileen Pinto (Unlicensed) UC Berkeley (Millennium)

Not attending

Discussion items

Item	Desired Outcome	Time	Who	Notes	Discussion	Actions
Announcements	Share short pieces of need-to-know information	10 min	All	End date of Vanguard environment access: December 18 Thoughts and questions about ExL’s Analytics demo on October 12 and Office hours on October 15 Question for campuses that have MARCIVE subscription: identification of MARCIVE records	Office hours: RF: UCSD has questions re: merge rules - it gets complicated with the various layers JH: gets clearer by looking at existing rules MB: can share some documentation to provide more info https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1SZmJDXKoema_QrJm3TcedfMdBDVNOt_G TJK: Any Alma campuses using DARA? Good tool to link up with CZ records. CL: Looks like its only available to “live” institutions Marcive: TSELG discussing UC-wide subscription for MARCIVE that could be managed in NZ, but CDL may not necessarily be in charge of managing it. Q for campuses: Do you have a way to easily identify Marcive records? SS: Attached to WMS collection, so easy to identify EQ: Identify with LDR and 910 so should be able to identify (just Documents w/o shelves) RF: add Marcive as cataloger in notes for 2010-current. Won’t be able to identify records loaded earlier. Would only get rid of online-only records. EP: Should all be marked with cataloging note & retain $x Marcive in 856. Need to double check MB: all have 049 CUZX JH: In 905, so should be able to identify KB: Have Marcive in 910, so should be able to identify Biggest issue will be p+o records. Possibility for joint subscription to begin with “go-live” and earlier records would be managed individually. Possibility of purchasing backfiles, but may be problematic to get just online records. EP: Are there any discussions of other packages to manage jointly? TJK: Question for RMFG and TSELG. Possibility to recommend requesting ExL to add a collection to the CZ as enhancement.
Resource Management FG’s test load decision: Decided: Local 856 bibliographic data Coming next: Local RLF bibliographic record migration Bibliographic records to leave out of NZ	Review decision made by RMFG Determine what, if any, recommendations for data cleanup, testing or post-migration cleanup will need to be made to support the decisions Determine how and when the recommendations should be shared	15 min	All		856: There’s a current enhancement request to allow 956 fields to be actionable as local version of 856 JH & EQ: Some local discussion about just getting rid of all 856s since they already have equivalent portfolios	@TJ Kao to work on more concise/easily digestible version of RMFG 856 recommendations
More migrated data review by Vanguard libraries	Share observation and learn about Vanguard migration results	30 min	All		KB: working locally on Basecamp questions to get more clarification on e-resource migration details, and how to interpret what we’re seeing TJK: Extra complication is ExL is now implementing CDI, and details are often lacking JH: started having discussions about training - have any other campuses starting discussion on NZ training? EQ: There will be systemwide training, but not for awhile. Can see if there’s enough interest to warrant specific NZ training. TJK: It’s hard to do training for staff if they don’t have regular access to Alma.

Add recommendations and communicate following harmonization decisions

P to E as future agenda item after vanguard load.