Requests
(UXPROD-790)
|
|
| Status: | Draft |
| Project: | UX Product |
| Components: | None |
| Affects versions: | None |
| Fix versions: | None | Parent: | Requests |
| Type: | New Feature | Priority: | TBD |
| Reporter: | Cate Boerema (Inactive) | Assignee: | Unassigned |
| Resolution: | Unresolved | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | v+v_candidate | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Issue links: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Potential Workaround: | The solution described in |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Epic Link: | Requests | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front End Estimate: | Small < 3 days | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front End Estimator: | Matt Connolly | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back End Estimate: | XL < 15 days | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back End Estimator: | Bohdan Suprun (Inactive) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Development Team: | Vega | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Kiwi Planning Points (DO NOT CHANGE): | 5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PO Rank: | 39 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PO Ranking Note: | 2021-03-28 - BT: Adjusting PO rank to match calculated total rank for now.
2020-10-23: Rankings aren't coming in that high so I am just setting my PO rank to the calculated total rank for now. 2020-10-05: Need more rankings on this, but tentatively setting high PO rank, as this is an R1 for a production library. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Chalmers (Impl Aut 2019): | R2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Chicago (MVP Sum 2020): | R5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Cornell (Full Sum 2021): | R2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Duke (Full Sum 2021): | R2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: 5Colleges (Full Jul 2021): | R4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: FLO (MVP Sum 2020): | R4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: GBV (MVP Sum 2020): | R4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Grand Valley (Full Sum 2021): | R4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Mainz (Full TBD): | R3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: MI State-Lib of MI (Sum 2021): | R3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: MO State (MVP June 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: St. Michael's College (Sum 2021): | R3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: TAMU (MVP Jan 2021): | R2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: U of AL (MVP Oct 2020): | R4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
Purpose: To disallow patrons from requesting ”local” page (because library staff should not need to fetch the item for patron in such cases). "We have libraries that, for example, would be willing to route page requests to other schools for grad students but don't want to do local pages for them (since the perception is that if they are local they should just go get the book.)" Definition: A “local page” is a page requests for an item where the request pickup location/SP is associated with the items’ effective location at the library where the item resides Use cases:
Wireframe: In scope:
Out of scope:
Additional information:
|
| Comments |
| Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 01/Oct/20 ] |
|
Bohdan Suprun and Matt Connolly could you please provide FE and BE estimates for this feature? Let me know if you don't understand the feature write-up. Thanks! |
| Comment by Matt Connolly [ 01/Oct/20 ] |
|
Cate Boerema Is this an all-or-nothing option? I'm just wondering. At Cornell, most of our libraries deny local pages – but there are a few exceptions (which I have to rather clumsily manage in the code of our current requests system!). How would that be handled in this implementation? I've estimated this feature based on the assumption that this is just a variable that will be stored in the request policy record, so the FE story is simply to put a control for that variable on the screen. |
| Comment by Bohdan Suprun (Inactive) [ 02/Oct/20 ] |
This will require changes in storage + changes in circulation to forward this property from storage - 8 days. Most likely there will be API breaking changes. Then we will have to add validation to create request logic, to prevent "local" requests. - 4-5 days.
There is no direct association between <item>-<request policy>, so UI will have to trigger circ rules in order to get request policy ID, they can use this API - /circulation/rules/request-policy and then fetch the request by id. |
| Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 02/Oct/20 ] |
Matt Connolly this is set in the request policy which is then associated with requests via circ rules. So, Cornell could create a "No local pages" request policy and a "Local pages allowed" request policy. Then in the circ rules they could associate "No local pages" with the libraries that disallow and "Local pages allowed" for the libraries that allow. Does that make sense?
Matt Connolly Yep, there's that tiny bit of work to do in Settings > Circulation > Request policies. But I also think there is a bit of work to do in Requests. We need to make sure that, when a user tries to create a request, if the selected pickup service point is disallowed because it is local, there needs to be some popup or something letting the user know why. Does that make sense?
Thanks Bohdan Suprun. I'll assume this will work the way the other policy blocks do, then. Namely, you will have to attempt to save the request before getting notified that the pickup service point is not allowed because local pages are not allowed. |
| Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 02/Oct/20 ] |
|
Matt Connolly, we'll also need to write some tests around this new functionality so we should probably beef up the estimate for that, as well. Thanks! |
| Comment by Matt Connolly [ 02/Oct/20 ] |
Cate Boerema Yes, thanks for the explanation!
Sorry, I didn't account for the requests work here (I was thrown off by the issue name "...in Request Policy"). I've bumped the estimate up to cover that. |
| Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 05/Oct/20 ] |
Ah, I see how that could be confusing. I removed that from the issue name. |
| Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 07/Mar/22 ] |
|
This feature is marked DRAFT until Brooks Travis has a chance to review it for validity. |
| Comment by Brooks Travis [ 26/Oct/22 ] |
|
Dennis Bridges This and/or
|
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 27/Oct/22 ] |
|
Thanks Brooks Travis |