There is going to be a UI component that allows you to view claims and approve them or not.
Should that UI be a component of receiving, or have a separate claiming UI? Claiming is a component of receiving, but from a workflow perspective it may be a different person.
Martina: For them it’s the same person
Susanne Gill (BVB) 8:06 AM +1 for Martina
Lisa Smith, Mich State 8:06 AM I'm ok with either choice
Dennis: Is it a different person for online claiming?
Martina: It might be different person but would be okay if they have the same permissions
Lisa Smith, Mich State 8:08 AM But we don't 'receive' electronic
Julie Stauffer 8:08 AM Our breakdown is serial (ongoing) vs monograph (one-time) orders, but I do not have a preference. Receiving makes sense to me.
Kristin: In the ERM group it’s been a conversation too and this is related to agreement lines.
Joe: Sounds like there isn’t a strong feeling one way or the other between a claiming app or doing it in receiving. Also sounds like it will be the same person that is receiving that will be claiming so not significantly different permissions.
When reviewing claims, assemble a list of late pieces, would you want to review those on a vendor by vendor basis, or just a comprehensive list of all the pieces that are late?
Susanne Gill (BVB) 8:12 AM Vendor
Susanne Gill (BVB) 8:15 AM Will we be able to print/send the list in total? Some of the Vendors don't use EDI
Joe: Right now working on only EDI. Plan is to eventually will be able to choose an option to send EDI, use an e mail, or download a file.
Joe: What information do you need to have on a summary screen of claim?
POL number
title
expected date
chron/enum?
Susanne Gill (BVB) 8:21 AM What is the claim cycle?
1st, 2nd, 3rd email….
Joe: Will work on going vendor by vendor, with the summary showing title, pol #, expected date, chron/enum….
Dennis: On the organization piece, are their groups here that create more than one organization for a vendor that you might claim across organization records?
Martina: That can happen. One record from the mono dept and one from the serial dept.
Scott Perry (UChicago) 8:25 AM Wouldn’t that be an account?
Yes, could be, but some institutions might be different.
Pamplin, Kimberly B 8:25 AM We do have multiple organization records (monographs/serials/databases), but like Martina is saying I don't think it would impact claiming of print.
Lisa Smith, Mich State 8:26 AM Same
:28
Renewal process group
Dennis
Dennis: Looking at putting together a smaller group working on the renewal process, workflow, innovation, opportunities for automation and integration, what could add value to that workflow. Invoicing aspect of that important? Save time? Putting out a call for interested people soon.
Preliminary discussions of new Reading Room App, with full presentation to be scheduled later.
:36
Implementers Topic 134
Implementers Topic 134
Receiving app: "Display on Holding"
Is it possible to set "Display on Holding" to always active somewhere in the app settings = make it configurable in settings?
Alternative: Would it be possible to check or uncheck the checkbox for "Display" in the process of receiving? Otherwise users need to edit the piece always as a separate step.
Molly Driscoll 8:41 AM Part of this has been addressed in Q -- the Display on holdings box is now on the Receiving screen. But, I still think it would be great to have it checked by default as a config option.
It can be viewed here in Q Bugfest: https://bugfest-quesnelia.int.aws.folio.org/receiving/receive/b46c8114-e068-4bea-ab36-b90b1d53d1ad?limit=50&offset=0&pieces.receivingStatus=Expected
The check by default might be post-Q. I'm not seeing that behavior in Q Bugfest.
Kristin: Would this address situations where the piece doesn’t have an item record?
This was captured under the Receiving updates (Updated: Adding a piece/piece details (changes to piece modal and receiving screen))
:50
Implementers Topic 135
Implementers Topic 135
Orders > Order Lines: Make selector a configurable list
In the Orders app when creating a POL, a selector can be added in a free text field.
For a user it would be helpful to choose one or multiple selectors from a multi-select list. This select list should be configurable in settings.
Thereby, the input would be standardized which would enable precise searching and filtering for orders that are assigned to specific selectors.
Aaron: Is this a managers systems admin role?
Martina: Yes, acq systems manager
Kristin: Want to point out that when making a change it needs to be communicated to data import. So if you're creating orders from data import, you would be able to pull in this information because we found, like with donor code, these changes were not done in data import and now we can’t use a new donor field.
Aaron: Is there a situation where a name is not sufficient?
Martina: Not for us
Lisa Smith, Mich State 8:56 AM We currently use initials and sometime we have a selector & approver in the same field.
