IC Populating the Network Zone
Legend: not started IN PROGRESS STALLED decided
Status | Decided |
---|---|
Description | Decide on a method for populating our Network Zone (NZ) with data, whether by union catalog data or from independent campus data |
Decision | The network zone will be populated by IZ contribution. |
Owning group | Implementation Coordinators |
Approver | Implementation Coordinators |
Stakeholders | RA = Implementation Coordinators |
Decision-making process | DECIDE: The implementation coordinators are responsible for this decision. INFORM: The decision will be made public on this page. |
Priority | Choose one: Mandatory before Go-live |
Due date | Mar 9, 2020 |
Recommendation
The implementation coordinators recommend that the Network Zone be populated from data from the individual campuses.
Background
Ex Libris has asked us to decide on a method for populating our Network Zone (NZ) with data. This is explained in detail here: https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Implementation_and_Migration/Migration_Guides_and_Tutorials/010Alma_Migration_Considerations_for_Consortia
Very briefly, there are two options:
No previous union catalog exists = “new shared catalog” option = Network Zone is populated by loading data into the institution zones (IZ) first, then pushing up to the NZ.
Previous union catalog exists = “previous shared catalog” option = Network Zone is populated with a copy of our master union catalog, and then the IZs pull down or link their records from there.
The Contract Negotiation Task Force did research in November and December, as we were asked to make a preliminary decision on this before the contract was finalized. The decision at the time was “we have no complete union catalog, so we will have to populate from the independent databases of each campus” = “new shared catalog” option. This was conveyed to ExL who then set up the contract estimates accordingly.
Our job as ICs is to now use our expertise to either ratify that existing decision, or change to the other option. Bottom line is that we don’t actually have a full and complete union catalog to start with, so option 2 is kind of off the table...
Pertinent Discussion
"I agree with your assessment that, based on the documentation, option 2 is not an option for us. Also based on what I already know about the Alma CZ, option two would be a lot more work for the individual campuses even if it were an option."
"I can imagine some complicated (and likely expensive) methods to extract possible holdings/records from the OCLC WC data that currently serves as our ‘union catalog’. But, just imaging that makes option 1 only look more appropriate."
Have a question? Send an email to the Implementation Coordinators with "populating the network zone" in the subject line: SILS-IC-L@listserv.ucop.edu (PM will respond to all questions.)
Action Log
Action/Point Person | Expected Completion Date | Notes | Status |
---|---|---|---|
Create info page and send out task to IC list @Caitlin Nelson | Feb 28, 2020 |
| done |
IC group discussion via email, @Bill Hackenberg (UCLA) (Unlicensed) | Mar 9, 2020 | “Consent agenda” style - if you have an objection lodge one, otherwise group will proceed with default. | done |
ICs vote / object individually for preferred option; PM collates and analyzes results @Bill Hackenberg (UCLA) (Unlicensed) | Mar 9, 2020 | Conclusion reached via email - no dissent | done |
Inform stakeholders via announcement mechanism @Lena Zentall (Unlicensed) | Mar 23, 2020 |
| done |
The SILS mission is to transform library services and operations through innovation and collaboration. The future is shared!
Question? Contact AskSILS-L@ucop.edu