Versions Compared

Old Version 1

changes.mady.by.user Mark Braden

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Jill Strykowski

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

2021-06-07 Meeting

Date

7 June 2021

1-2pm

Attendees

  • Mark Braden, Los Angeles (Chair)
  • Lia Ryland, San Francisco (Vice-Chair)
  • Carole A. Chapman, San Luis Obispo
  • Brinna Pam Anan (Pomona)
  • Janine Pitt (Channel Islands)
  • Amy Rudberg (Northridge)
  • brandon dudley, CO Ex Officio

Agenda

Item

Notes

Announcements

Anything you'd want to tell us?

Primo VE Evaluation (winter/spring 2021)

  • Discovery issued their report and recommendation (attached to this mail message that contains the Agenda)
  • ULMS Steering Committee affirmed the recommendation.
  • COLD will review and decide on 17 June.
  • Major benefit in VE: All records (bib/holding/item/portfolio/POLine) are processed and 'published' within a short time, making VE a 'live' tool for Alma-related data.


  • Your comments/issues?

ExL Customer Survey 2021

Issues document passed to Brandon for his analysis and next steps.

RM Transition June/July


-Two people (Mark, Carole) will retire from the committee.

Content Notes

No further action yet.
Previously…:
Julie Moore (Fresno) will investigate 'critical cataloging' in a sabbatical in 2021
Identify folk who expressed interest to form a working group, assign the group to studying the issue, identifying use cases, and build Best Practice advice.
Added 20210301: Janine shared (via email) a note from Maritime to Technical Services, offering a few examples of alerts/warnings

Retention Notes (SCELC, WEST)


Any clever ideas or thoughts?

  • Standard format descriptions (for collections/titles/attributions)?
  • Ideas that might reduce 'hits' in other CSU Primo searches?


    From February:
    A task force ("stand-up meeting") discussed the issue, Brandon opened a Salesforce case, and ExL has issued their famous response:
    "Yes, this works as expected."
    Control of fields displayed is possible and easier than control of fields indexed, when the desire is to control a Local Field to searches made only in the Library's own Instance. Controlling index of Local Fields using Library ID codes in $$5 (e.g., 01CALS_ULA or CLA), is not possible, currently.
    The CSU is welcome to make an Enhancement Request.
    Before February:
    Libraries have coded retention notes in fields that:
  • Display in Library's own Primo Instance
  • But are indexed in Central CSU Primo indexes

    Are there fields that index/display only in the Local Instance?
    Currently, there are notes for:
  • SCELC retention decisions
  • WEST retention decisions

    Can you think of any other collection decisions that have or might be encoded in bibliographic fields?
  • Can/Would Ex Libris TURN OFF Indexing 590s at the NZ Level? No
  • Can/Would Ex Libris encode setting Primo Display using $$5 NUC Symbol? No
  • Which fields in the 5xx series are indexed Locally AND in the NZ/Primo?

    Which fields are indexed Local Instance and Displayed in the Local Instance?
  • Analyzed Titles
  • Notes about the condition/handling of the work (e.g., "autographed")
  • Honor with Books (honoring donors, employees)
  • Accompanying materials in particular location
  • Historic "second location" notes
  • Piece notes. Local Notes that reflect the item in hand.(note can go in Public Note in Item Record)
  • Notes about alternate formats ("microform")
    Copies in other areas of the University.

DEI Efforts/Policies

Policies/practices/discussions about DEI efforts in CSU Libraries What discussions/efforts are underway in your Library? Those who have remarks:-SLO SC (Carole)-SFSU (Lia)

Other Items?

 

...