2020-04-27

Owned by Emma Boettcher
Last updated: Apr 28, 2020
3 min read

Agenda

  • Changing item status from item record, and when to push decisions to other SIGs
  • Custom item status & customizing existing item statuses

Notes

Notetaker: Martina Schildt

Changing item status from item record - approach for going forward

  • last week: discussion on changing status from/to
  • we need to be able to change a status from one to another
  • cannot change anything from checked out, claimed returned, declared lost, on order
  • would be nice to be able to change a status from one to another, but defer to SIG that decided on process that otherwise changes status
    • change status to on order (discuss with RM SIG) → Martina will take that to the RM SIG
    • item status group agrees that users should not be able to change back to status on order (other than in the ACQ Apps)


  • example for in process
    • for Chicago in process means that the item is somewhere between order and shelf
    • people need to start of an item status as in process - without needing to have an order
    • question: is an order necessary for items?
      • no, you can start in inventory with an item and an item status
      • creating an item record is decoupled from creating an order
      • currently there are RM discussions to start in receiving for items that are i.e. gifts and do not need orders
      • this is under discussion, development has not started yet
    • item status group likes the possibility to start in receiving for materials that do not need an order


Permissions

  • differentiate between permissions to change an item to a particular value
  • permissions to change an item from a particular value


Custom item status

(see mock-ups below)

  • each status requires a name
  • then people can select the different settings for the custom item status

example for a custom item status:

  • i.e. for items that are dummy records, i.e. for implementing analytics, as the analytics/bound with functionality is not available yet
  • resources that are in storing facilities; available means something else here
  • those items can be checked out, but they need to be requested like an ILL
  • other example: commercial binding: items are sent out
  • for these cases, other custom statuses are needed than "not available"
    • one way would be - no one can request this
    • another way would be to add a location of i.e. bindery (in circ rules)
  • cutom status might be useful for status "in repair" as well
  • question: do we need a discovery display name for custom item statuses; do people expect to set that at status level?
    • Chicago does
    • it can be useful to change the status name in the ILS instead of the catalogue
    • this might not be included in many systems that people are currently using, but it is helpful and necessary for many people who want to migrate their systems to folio
  • which are the more needed or varyable ones?
    • requestability
    • ability to change in bulk (not yet part of the mock-up)
      • from previous discussions the logic was thought to be the same as for individual changes
      • bulk changes would be needed for most of the item statuses
      • would need control over who can do it  (but is less of a priority)
      • most people would not be allowed to, but the ones who can would need to be allowed a lot
      • bulk functionality need is true for most custom properties such as "in bindery", "analytics", "in preservation"
    • the settings shown in the mock-up would need to be configurable for the different use cases and possible custom item statuses
      • i.e. if a patron has an item in hand that has status "for repair" as one possible custom status, this can be checked out, but there may be other cases where this is not the case

Zoom

Recording

To-do

ACTION:  Recommendation to lock permissions for changing status back to "on order" for users of orders app.  Martina will take to RM SIG