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? |
|