Skip to end of banner
Go to start of banner

2021-05-11 Acquisitions Group Meeting Notes

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

Version 1 Current »

Attendees

Ann Crowley

Ann-Marie Breaux (Deactivated)

William Verner

Dennis Bridges

Dung-Lan Chen

@ dfowler

diane.cannon

@Frances Dotson

Heather

Jackie Magagnosc

Jean M. Pajerek

Julie Stauffer

@Katy Kazee

Kimberly Pamplin

Lindsey Lowry

Lisa Maybury

 @ Loyd Marmot

Martina Schildt

@Masayo Uchiyama 

Michael Phillips

@Okay Okechukwu 

@Sashirley

Scott Perry

Scott Stangroom

Shannon Burke

@Shyama Agrawal

@Steven Selleck

Susan Martin

@Suzanne Mangrum

TRINH BETHARD


Discussion items


Juniper update from Dennis 

Overview of current R2 features 

Dennis: Conversation starts at 4 minutes after. 

Link to board https://issues.folio.org/secure/RapidBoard.jspa?rapidView=44 

Discussed status: 

UXPROD 2373 = Allow for the display – not implementing yet. Still part of R2, but have to finish 1925 first before can start on this one. Need the connection from the pol to the holdings.  This link has to be there before we can create orders based on Marc data.

1925, have started implementing.  Allows order info in inventory. This opens the door for 2373

2372 – piece information displaying in the holdings record. Having this link in holdings allows for more data import.

2364 – Order searching, and sorting broken down into more detail the enhancement features.

2846 – R2 Tech Debt – description of work done.

2991 Implement baseline shortcut Keys for acquisitions apps

3059 – Add translations for permissions that do not translate

2364 Order searching enhancement – additional filters have been added.

                Subscription or not

                Expense class

Bulk of the work is in making searching faster.  Cross index queries

2847 – Support for import invoice in Edifact invoicing, - There are a few more stories to work on. Relinking and a few other things.  

2893 – print/save orders

Dennis: Do you think it’s valuable to do this review in this group at the outset of the release? The development team starts working on the next release quite a few weeks before the public release.



UX PROD 2372

For the video: 20 minutes after

Linking pol’s to holding record.

Update to order record location

What is your expectation for orders creating order records.

Baseline – in the pol, selecting where we intend to receive that. In new workflow, it is possible to select a specific holding record from the instance that is commented. As a user is it possible for wanting to have a second holding for the same location?

If I am the user, and I know there is a holding for the main library, would I possibly want to create another holdings with the permanent location of main library?  Dung-Lan Chen – There are cases where we might need to be able to do this.  

                At Duke, holdings is not created at point of order.

                Ann-Marie Two workflows’s possible

Temp holding created at point of order that needs to be updated during receiving or cataloging.

Or

Not creating holdings at point of order, will do either manually or by importing when received.

Dennis: The workflow that we have talked about so far are, the changes discussed here shouldn’t impact them. Question here is very specific for clicking on ‘Create new holdings for location’

Example, In inventory, we have for two copies in the main library. Do I want the possibility of creating a second holdings record the same location?

For ongoing orders, you would want two copies in the same location but on separate holdings…..

Dennis: Do want to be able to say, I know we have a holdings here, but I want a new holdings in the same location.

 Chat: From Jean Pajerek to Everyone:  12:34 PM We would want this ability at our library - two holdings for the same library,

Chat: From Martina Schildt to Everyone:  12:34 PM same in our libraries

Dennis: so at point of order, this is the expectation.

Chat From Jackie Magagnosc to Everyone:  12:36 PM Thinking especially of a situation where you hold a copy and decide to add a second in the same location

From Jean Pajerek to Everyone:  12:37 PM - Especially important for multi-volume titles.

From Susan Martin to Everyone:  12:38 PM That's different. We would have a holding which would correspond with a location. Then items would hang off of that

Different libraries do it differently. Some have one holdings for multiple copies, others each copy will have it’s own holdings record.

If a library has 4 copies of an item with 4 holding records, do they transfer from your ILS as 4 records or as 1? 

 

Chat: From Jean Pajerek to Everyone:  12:40 PM That would become very complex and confusing in a situation where there are multiple copies, each with multiple volumes, if they are all on the same holdings.

Dennis: If you are selecting from the drop down list, you are selecting an existing holdings record.

If you click create new holdings from location, you pick a location. You can pick main library, but it will create a new holdings.  It will not show a call number, just ‘main library’. How you chose to run your system is up to you, but this gives you both options.

Shyama: There is not a downside to having both options.

Dennis: If you select the holdings you are not creating a new location. If you create a new one, maybe it’s not obvious enough what is going on. The fear of having the two possibilities is that it’s easier for errors to happen. Based on today’s discussion, we need both possibilities. We needed to confirm that.


Testing updated receiving functionality which incorporates the Holdings link


Dennis: We are going to need as help as we can get to test this functionality. Possibly in the next couple of weeks I’d like to run a US testing for this. This will also impact when you are editing an order and want to adjust the quantity of the order. There will be more options in receiving as well. We have done as much as we can here talking through these functions. Now need people to test.  These changes will not be in snapshot. This will be tested in a separate space.  Hopefully come together as a group and get people to test these functions.

Discuss results of poll at Refining available columns in order search result list

For the video: 54 minutes after

https://wiki.folio.org/display/RM/Refining+available+columns+in+order+search+result+list Poll is now closed, but can take a look at the results.  Can discuss Thursday what we currently have and what voters want to see. Was everyone able to find this and vote?

  • Feedback was people were not sure if their vote was counted since there was not a submit button. Probably because he has it set as people are allowed to change their vote.






  • No labels