Date
...
- Paul Trumble
- Eric Hartnett
- Nancy Pelis
- Owen Stephens
- Caroline Schmunck
- Moonyung Kang-Larsen
- meobrien
- Stew MacLehose
- Jay Campbell
- Tim Whisenant
- Kimie Kester
- jmulvaney@library.umass.edu
- Julie Brannon (old account)
- Abigail Wickes
- Ann Crowley
- Heather Thoele
Discussion items
Item | Who | Notes |
---|---|---|
Minute taker? | Eric Hartnett | |
Announcements/Updates
|
| |
WOLFCon ideas; Joint RM/RA/MM SIG meeting around "item states" | Some parameters:
Registration is now open. There is also a Slack channel for answering WOLFCon questions (#folio-wolfcon2020). Suggested topics:
| |
Acquisitions/access types for e-holdings | Acquisition/access status type = a way to support necessary changes to holdings; informed decisions; streamlined management of current state of holdings (e.g. "subscribed", purchased with perpetual access; trial; post cancellation access). They are created in the settings and selected under package settings. Users will be able to filter package results by access type. It will not be a required field. How are people currently tracking access status? What are the key workflows to consider? Chicago has an Access database where they track it and mainly use it for reporting. TAMU and UMASS use an acquisition type in CORAL - it does affect some workflows. What are the expectations for this to interact with other apps? It would be good to track DDA holdings between apps. Open access also. Should there be a set list or should users be able to create custom ones? It was suggested that there be an initial list with the ability to add new ones. If functionality is being driven by the type, having custom values makes things much more complicated. For the Agreements app, Owen has been cautious about having custom values for this reason. Why not use tags? Chalmers is currently using tags for access types but it's not the optimal solution. |