Item | Notes |
Announcements | Anything you'd want to tell us?
|
Primo VE Evaluation (winter/spring 2021) | Some key discoveries and issues and efforts in April: -Primo Specialists continue to configure and discuss solutions, both in Basecamp notes to Ex Libris personnel, and to each other via Slack and email. -The Discovery group led testing efforts, and now the Chair and Vice-Chair will analyse and discuss the content. A 'straw poll' (17 Libraries responded) supported VE. -This effort brought out the breadth of personnel available for Primo Configuration/Testing, and of skill to make solutions from Norm Rules, CSS and other software tools. -Discovery's final decision is expected 28 May
|
ExL Customer Survey 2021 | What content can you add, what issues would you want to be a part of the Resource Management discussion with ExL? Survey the document that Brandon distributed, please offer ideas for issues or content/data/use cases to add to the Resource Management response.
|
RM Transition June/July | -Two people (Mark, Carole) will retire from the committee. -Brandon outlined the transition in an email.
|
Excluded MARC Fields | Any changes to the Draft? When the RM group accept the policy, I'll submit it to the Steering Committee for their affirmation.
|
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 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.
|
Other Items? | |