...
Goals
- Draft vision document for an Open Source Bib Utility
Notes
Lucy: Spoke to several catalogers at University of Georgia to add user stories to the vision document. Asked them to think about their workflows that include OCLC. They added many user stories. There are things in each section, consortial services, director, acquisitions, collection development, resource sharing. Resource sharing may not be appropriate here, but it may not hurt.
Sebastian: one point of view might be there is a bunch of resource sharing that doesn't belong here but there is some overlap.
Lucy: Yes, that's why we want to bring this to Project ReShare, because of that overlap.
Sebastian: There is a bunch of stuff here that seems to touch on fulfillment that probably doesn't belong in a bib utility vision document.
Lucy: Right.
Jill: I think the place it does belong though is, there were some questions I think from Noah around what ReShare is going to be able to provide to people that are all on the same ILS, and whether there's maybe some additional functionality that could come into play there. It would be nice at least for ReShare to look at this and say we check that box or maybe we check that box. I would suggest maybe leaving it for now because I think it give us some additional perspective.
Lucy: Noah is looks like you are on now. Did you have any thoughts on this.
Noah: Lucy, I did just get one. I'm not up to speed.
Lucy: We looked at the bib utility document.
Noah: I think we can add some things in. I did catch Jill talking about the possible advantages to a group on the same system. So I go in and add some of those from our perspective that might be useful.
Lucy: Great. And then I don't know where the model section, is that intended to be the high level vision for this.
Noah: I think Lloyd wrote that.
Lucy: Maybe we could all take a moment and read the Model section, and see if that captures what we want it to.
Noah: Sounds good.
Jill: So my question would be is this too prescriptive?
Sebastian: So I have a question to the statement, I forget with context, I think it was Allen Jones from New School and I were talking about BPL and we were reaffirming the notion that we have talked about often in ReShare where we talk about consortial constructs, were we want to leave it up to the libraries and consortium to define the rules of the game and how the consortium is organized as apposed to having the software mandate it. My question to this statement is: is this really true or are there senarious where libraries agree that they catalogedWork on wordsmithing the bib utility vision document. Discussion again of the two possible models of cataloging in a central system or a system that harvests records from local systems where the cataloging takes place. The Model section is edited to include both options. The system would harvest from libraries and allow for cataloging directly in the central utility to create it's database.
Discussion of when this vision document could be brought to the ICOLC steering committee. They meet every week, but will probably skip Dec 21. We could bring this to a meeting of the ICOLC steering committee in early January.
Lucy asks about FOLIO functionality. She wants to know if there are plans for supporting multiple single sign on identity providers for a consortia operating on a single server. They would require this if they were going to share a single tenant.
Peter says there's a UXPROD for this idea, but it is not ranked very high.
Discussion items
| Time | Item | Who | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Draft Vision Document | https://docs.google.com/document/d/14sqECAp87ZMpNeGP6Qxd4tIes4YUQ3SzxnLUWN9sCD0/edit?usp=sharing | ||
...