Users App
(UXPROD-784)
|
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | UX Product |
| Components: | None |
| Affects versions: | None |
| Fix versions: | Q3 2019 | Parent: | Users App |
| Type: | New Feature | Priority: | P3 |
| Reporter: | Cate Boerema (Inactive) | Assignee: | Khalilah Gambrell |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | cap-mvp, migration-load, usermanagement | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue links: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Epic Link: | Users App | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Analysis Estimator: | Khalilah Gambrell | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front End Estimate: | Medium < 5 days | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front End Estimator: | Jakub Skoczen | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back End Estimate: | Very Small (VS) < 1 day | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back End Estimator: | Jakub Skoczen | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Estimation Notes and Assumptions: | Assume large text field for Notes record | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Development Team: | Spitfire | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PO Rank: | 93 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: BNCF (MVP Feb 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Chalmers (Impl Aut 2019): | R5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Chicago (MVP Sum 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Cornell (Full Sum 2021): | R4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Duke (Full Sum 2021): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: 5Colleges (Full Jul 2021): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: FLO (MVP Sum 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: GBV (MVP Sum 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: hbz (TBD): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Hungary (MVP End 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Lehigh (MVP Summer 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Leipzig (Full TBD): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: TAMU (MVP Jan 2021): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: U of AL (MVP Oct 2020): | R2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
We have the general Notes feature Filip designed but there is actually a need for more context-specific Notes fields within the user record (we have similar needs in other record types, as well, such as in Finances). This may be as simple as a large text field for "Notes" in v1 per a comment in the User Metadata Doc. Or it could need to be more robust. Will need to loop RA in on this convo. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 05/Dec/18 ] |
|
Removing Q1 2019 fix version due to limited capacity in Q1 2019. |
| Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 22/Mar/19 ] |
|
Removing all but the essential features from the Q2 2019 Core Functional team backlog. After we've run the estimates through the cap plan, we may find we can pull in more. |
| Comment by Anya [ 29/Mar/19 ] |
|
Comment from March Meeting : Good to have this by the end of q2 |
| Comment by Khalilah Gambrell [ 20/May/19 ] |
|
We should see if the work in progress for Notes https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BMitl09O4C_cg2cN34T5ofZ88Xg3ub3RysDfS6Vue20/edit#slide=id.p will meet Users SIG needs. cc: Cate Boerema and Tania Fersenheim |
| Comment by Tania Fersenheim [ 21/May/19 ] |
|
Khalilah Gambrell - is the thinking that every record (of every type - user record, item record, instance record, etc) will have a Notes accordion section that will integrate with the Notes app? |
| Comment by Khalilah Gambrell [ 21/May/19 ] |
|
Tania Fersenheim |
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 04/Jul/19 ] |
|
Hi Khalilah Gambrell - while we yet don't have customizable fields (
Is there a time plan for when the Notes feature is expected to be implemented in the User app? BNCF are going live Autumn 2019. |
| Comment by Khalilah Gambrell [ 04/Jul/19 ] |
|
Charlotte Whitt - I have demoed the functionality to the UM SIG. And it was well-received so I defer to capacity planning. My only concern is data privacy since the fields you outlined are PII data. That data must be/should be encrypted when stored and in transit. |
| Comment by Annalisa Di Sabato [ 04/Jul/19 ] |
|
Yes, you're right. But as we already said this is only a workaround, to give to the UM SIG the necessary time to consider/develop and include the new fields required in the Patron Card. When we'll have the right field in the Patron Card, we will migrate/move the previously data in their real fields. Do you agree? Do you think it can be acceptable solution? |
| Comment by Erin Nettifee [ 04/Jul/19 ] |
|
Is anyone from Florence on (or able to join) the UM SIG? You have a strong use case for custom fields - and in general if the user record is going to be important to you, you should have someone come join the conversation. Having said that, I'd be concerned about Notes as a workaround because that is PII data. There is no current timeline for custom fields, so you'd have no ability to forecast how long you'd have to use it, and I think you are going to find resistance from non-European institutions to adding those fields to a default installation, because the sense has been that that form would become cluttered really quickly. We also currently do not have a PO, and no members of the current SIG are able to commit to being the PO because of the time involved. Also, using Notes for that data calls into question a lot of things, like reporting, anonymization/deletion, and the like. I don't know if it will be in place by your launch date, but the LDP, for example, will most likely take the Notes field into its storage. You then have to figure out how to anonymize that data or delete that data without potentially deleting other notes data that could be needed to be retained. |
| Comment by Uschi Klute [ 04/Jul/19 ] |
|
Perhaps we could also discuss at the next UM SIG meeting whether the user Notes should be stored in the LDP at all. I'm afraid we won't have any other choice but to store those data fields temporarily in a notes field (the fields that are currently not available in FOLIO). The GBV libraries also use fields like gender or identity card information. |
| Comment by Annalisa Di Sabato [ 05/Jul/19 ] |
|
Really, at the moment for us, it would be enough to have a simple note field, with the possibility to add more than one. |
| Comment by Erin Nettifee [ 09/Jul/19 ] |
|
Uschi Klute - the LDP is just the example that came to mind - I think anonymizing the notes field for users would be difficult in general, and there will be enough institutions that will want that to be brought into the LDP that it could be difficult to have a hard-wired solution that would work for all parties. What's the business case for storing the additional information? I'm not suggesting that you all don't have a need for it, but this could be an opportunity to evaluate whether information actually needs to be kept. Most US libraries are getting away from storing gender, for instance. Annalisa Di Sabato - User Managements meets on Wednesdays at 10 AM US Eastern Time. I would encourage you to sign up for the mailing list as that list is used to coordinate meeting agendas and other discussions. https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/UM |
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 11/Jul/19 ] |
|
Jubii. Thanks Khalilah Gambrell CC: Annalisa Di Sabato and Tiziana Possemato |