Inventory
(UXPROD-785)
|
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | UX Product |
| Components: | None |
| Affects versions: | None |
| Fix versions: | Q2 2019 | Parent: | Inventory |
| Type: | New Feature | Priority: | P2 |
| Reporter: | Charlotte Whitt | Assignee: | Charlotte Whitt |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue links: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| Epic Link: | Inventory | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Analysis Estimator: | Charlotte Whitt | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Front End Estimate: | Medium < 5 days | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Front End Estimator: | Niels Erik Nielsen | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Front-End Confidence factor: | Low | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Back End Estimate: | Medium < 5 days | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Back End Estimator: | Niels Erik Nielsen | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Estimation Notes and Assumptions: | Need status update for the work on RMB and performance optimization of Inventory queries in order to increase confidence factor. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Development Team: | Prokopovych | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: BNCF (MVP Feb 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Chalmers (Impl Aut 2019): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Chicago (MVP Sum 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Cornell (Full Sum 2021): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: 5Colleges (Full Jul 2021): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: U of AL (MVP Oct 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
Purpose: Search by barcode. Implement search criteria, in the drop down menu in the Search box for Basic search functionality.
|
| Comments |
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 25/Mar/19 ] |
|
Hi Jakub Skoczen and Hongwei Ji - Niels Erik Nielsen estimated this, but we need to have your input and status update for the work on RMB and performance optimization of Inventory queries in order to increase confidence factor. Thanks much! |
| Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 27/Mar/19 ] |
|
Possible workaround might be to scan the item in check in and them select item details from the action menu. It's more clicks, though (3 clicks as opposed to, presumably, 1). Would the extra scans in check in check in negatively affect in house use statistics? Based on what I think Emma Boettcher recently said about plans for In House Use feature (
|
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 27/Mar/19 ] |
|
Hi @cate, that possible workaround using the check in app is only supposed to be a temporary solution, for Chalmers to use Q2 2019, right? |
| Comment by Emma Boettcher [ 27/Mar/19 ] |
|
Cate Boerema In that situation, it would affect in-house use stats (as they're intended to be counted). In-house use is defined as a scan of a recently returned or available item that results in a status of recently returned or available. I see Chalmers has ranked in-house use as not-needed, though, so perhaps it's not a priority to count that accurately and they could use this as a workaround, but I don't think it'll work long-term for other places. This raises some other questions, though: is the person scanning the item assigned to a service point? Is that service point necessarily assigned to the item's home location (will this item go in transit and then have to be scanned again to come out of of transit)? What happens if scanning the item alerts the user to other information (it's Missing, it's on hold for someone), and will the person scanning be equipped to deal with all of those? |
| Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 27/Mar/19 ] |
|
Good points, Emma Boettcher. Sounds like it's not a good workaround, after all |
| Comment by Erin Nettifee [ 08/Apr/19 ] |
|
RA SIG sees this as a core function / need for go-live at a minimum. Erin / Andrea |