...
Attendees : Andy Horbal, Sarah Seestone, Jana Freytag, Dwayne Swigert, Laszlo Jakusovsky, David Bottoff, Andrea Loigman, Kimie Matsudo Kester, Sebastian Hammer Notes: Ian Ibbotson
Scope:
- DB: Initial scope vs Ultimate Scope - Ultimate scope is full CDL/ILL but initially scope is internal.
- AL : Stages - start with CDL from our own offsite collections for our own people
- Then grow out into consortial ILL
- SS: Very much internal - Stanford Collections, internally - maybe eventually more broadly
- DB: Do / Don't we need to draw a distinction between ILL and internal
- Chicago - CDL for course reserves
- AH: Cornell - What CDL is may depend upon what is delivered
- Knowing what we are building towards may help institutions plan / decide
- AL: Draw a distinction between whole collections being sequestered vis item-by-item level
- DB: We should not draw the internal scope too narrowly to begin with
- Some current practice using GoogleDrive links to canvas in course-ware
- Sequester items for the duration of the course - check items out to proxy account
- Successful 2-3k items on course reserve loan using this approach
- DB affirmed the need for this to be generalized - because different institutions will want to have radically different policies - E.G. Paging/Holds on items.
- Initial scope - not a delivery platform inside folio
- DB Question: Will this include a delivery platform
- SS: Question - what mechanism is being used to make items unavailable currently
- DB - pseudo patron
- SS: requirement - currently using ILS for charging to the user
- DB - rather see FOLIO develop something that can handle a better fidelity model of the distinction between sequestering the physical and loaning the digital.
- A question around the separation between physical and electronic items
- SS the challenge is that - absolute tie-in between A-physical-item and A-electronic-item - and have 1 item with a mode-of-access property.
- SH : Aspects of own-to-loan ratios
- DB +1 own to loan ratio is key
- Know that the physical item is sequestered
- know that the physical item is loaned
- DB +1 own to loan ratio is key
- AL : Asked SS about Stanford Differentiating between physical and digital loans
- And noted that this is important
- AL : Usage - do we need more physical or more electronic copies - we need to know when a different mode of access is used.
- Check out to pseudo patron - then layer some record-keeping on top of that - Symphony doesn't count the bindery/pseudo patron loan as a use. hold module can tell who held an item.
- Implementation can be brittle if datasets get out of sync
- AL: Reporting is key - the ability to do data analytics and later on work out who held what
- SS: Be better if the ILS better understood that a check-out was digital access and the physical was sequestered.
- SH: Do we need FOLIO to be able to work in both modes - Separate electronic and physical or unified
- AL: Duration of digital loans - and how intensive is the usage
- DB: Do we embed the delivery in FOLIO or use something external
- AL: It almost has to be external - this will have to work outside FOLIO
- II: Taxonomy of delivery systems - IIIF/google drive type approaches vs Readium
- DB: There are pressures
- AL: Different levels of comfort from different general council
- DB - Current implementation is fine - no direct pressure
- AH: It might not be urgent "We need this now" - "We can't implement without this"
- AH: The point at which CDL starts appearing as lines on RFP
- SH: Should we "Pitch" CDL at WolfCon to see what interest there is in the community
Interoperability
- SH: NISO project has identified some large categories of things that we should interoperate with - CIRC, DRM, ILL
- DB: Lets get someone from MM into this call to talk about the modelling aspect of this
- SS: Sequester of physical item
- ItemState PO
- Action:II Follow up to see if someone from MM can come talk to us
- AL: Go physically fetch
- All: This is a good slot for meetings
List of requirements:
Requirements should contain (needs more detail):
...