Meeting Time:    8 am EST /  2 pm CET / 1 pm UK

Call in Number:     https://zoom.us/j/995679876 

Meeting URL:  https://zoom.us/j/995679876 Password needed: please see link below

https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/display/COMMUNITY/FOLIO+Meetings+with+Zoom

ERM SIG Folio Wiki: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/display/ERMSIG/

Google Folder: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17X3tr6siZH8iS07kGcjAqUNl01zVrJmB

Terms and definitions: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vue-mbcULpZivWu69a7nAZEdC-H2yXPQqSblbL_0J6U

Slack Channel: # erm-team

Agenda Feb 21th 2024

Convener: Martina T.
Notetaker: Martina S.

Housekeeping

• All: Please edit the attendees list below and indicate when you are there!

• Next ERM meeting:  Mar 6, 2024

• All questions and ERM implementers' topics can be posted on: ERM implementers.

• PC meetings

  • 2024-02-08 Product Council Agenda and Meeting Notes

  • 2024-02-15 Product Council Agenda and Meeting Notes

Agenda items

1. Update on ERM SIG meeting frequency and subgroups

2. Development progress - ERM sprint 185
   
   

3. Avoiding multiple users editing a record at the same time (continuation)

4. Implementers topic #5: Numeration of Agreement lines

Minutes

Update on ERM SIG meeting frequency and subgroups

• From March 2024 onwards, meeting frequency will be reduced to one meeting every 4 weeks - starting March 6th.

• The subgroup on local KB topics would meet every 4 weeks as well - starting March 20th - at 8am ET as well.

• Eholdings subgroup will meet in between - every 4 weeks as well  - starting on March 13th - lead by @Zorian Sasyk - starting at 8am ET, maybe time will change as many eholdings users are in US

• Zoom links and invitations will follow - there will be new links for the different meetings

Development progress

• a lot of work the team is looking at is related to importing data to the local KB

• there were a number of issues reported with the GOKB imports

• this sprint a lot of the time will go into solving these issues

• institutions using the live GOKB connected to ERM will notice slowness due to the amount of data - work is going on here - same applies to snapshot that has been connected to GOKB as well and is currently newly harvesting the data

• there will be a significantly larger number of titles in the local KB after harvesting has finished

• initial harvest sometimes takes a month

• performance fixes will be backported to Poppy

• small usability improvements will be released

Avoiding multiple users editing a record at the same time (continuation)

• Usually when 2 users change a record at the same time, they are editing different things which both need to be saved

• switch to record locking needs to be done app by app

• key record types to change to record locking

  1. do first Agreements,

  2. then Agreement lines

  3. then Licences and

  4. Amendments

• the ERM SIG agrees to this order

• next steps:

  • Owen to so some planning

  • most probably copying existing implementation (MARC record source)

  • analyse where we need/want anything more

  • work with Gill to do some designs together

  • planning for Ramsons or Sunflower

  • more discussions will happen as soon as we have some designs

Implementers topic #5: Numeration of Agreement lines

• implementers topic came up in last discussion

• this applies in several different places

• would like to add a column -

  • with agreement line number

  • clicking on column value would lead to view the agreement line

• as in orders, which seems to be the most relatable example to compare to

• numbering would be sequentially

  • when deleting an AGL: the number can not be re-used - the system will create the next available number as AGL#

• Comment by Felix in chat: To me having numbers for agreements and AGRLines seems artificial. In Orders this number is used a lot when talking internally or with the vendor. It will be printed on order slips and then it makes finding the order easy when you have to receive the piece. But there is no similar workflow for agreements.

• Owen: there are 2 things we would like to achieve

  • one thing to click

  • another to have a way to refer to an agreement line

• Clara in chat: Personally, as an eholdings user, I'm having trouble imagining searching agls by the equivalent to an agl number, since that would just be another number to remember that isn't any less arbitrary than the reference number

• Owen: sometimes there is a mixture of attached (eholdings) and unattached AGLs where numbers can be handy

• Clara: would add one more layer of confusion

• Zorian in chat: My initial thoughts are similar to Felix's

  • why can names from eholdings packages not be searchable like unattached AGLs

  • Owen: this would be a good topic for the new eholdings subgroup

    • Zorian in chat: Agreed, we can take it up in the eHoldings group

  • reasons are architectural and implementation decisions

  • system just stores the reference number in Agreements due to eholdings implementation decisions

  • none of these decisions are set in stone

  • Clara: being able to search eholdings package or title name in Agreements would help users

    • calls to HLM slow search in Agreements down

  • Felix in chat: when you store it, then you would not have to make those calls at all. But maybe implement a function to refresh the data that is stored in Agreements. In case data in eHoldings change

• Gail in chat: I agree with Felix, but I do think some kind of numbering for AGLs would be very helpful when you have lots of AGLs on an AG and are trying to keep track of what you're looking at, and I don't like the idea of different numbering systems across apps, so mirroring the imperfect orders numbering makes the most sense to me.

• Clara in chat: To be clear, even though I don't see much help to the agreement-agl numbering system as far as searching goes, I do agree with Gail (and Sara) that numbering on the agls in the agreements view would make it easier to keep track of what you're doing/something to click on

  • *be something reasonable to click on

• So far AGLs sort by Name/description > if the name or description is changed, the order will change - or if there is a new line that sorts in between

  • we could either come up with a transitory numbering system > then the numbering would be a place to click > number would change if the order of AGLs would change

  • or we could implement numbering in a more persistent way

  • question: does it matter to users?

• Clara: Not a strongly held opinion, but I would be worried about the implications for agreements with large numbers of agls if they had persistent numbering

• Martina T.: would go for persistent numbering

• Clara: often AGLs are deleted or added > with persistent numbering everything would be over the place - could be confusing to users

  • often there are hundreds of AGLs

  • but that is not a strongly held opinion

• How persistent should AGLs be?

  • when adding an AGL > system could look for the first empty slot

  • or take deletion of an AGL as a trigger to renumber all AGLs

• Clara: every numbering system would be better than none

• Felix in chat: Please just add +1 every time and leave gaps in between.

• Felix in chat: What about a prefix? 10585 could otherwise be a PO number or an AGR number...

  • Owen: that would be possible, but it might be better to treat numbering as a sequence within an Agreement

  • possible: AGR1, AGL1, AL1, Line 1 > means slightly less precision in mouse finding clickable number

Chat

14:02:27 Von Martina Tumulla an Alle:
today's agenda: 2024-02-21 - ERM meeting
14:31:37 Von Felix Hemme an Alle:
To me having numbers for agreements and AGRLines seems artificial. In Orders this number is used a lot when talking internally or with the vendor. It will be printed on order slips and then it makes finding the order easy when you have to receive the piece. But there is no similar workflow for agreements.
14:31:58 Von Felix Hemme an Alle:
What are we trying to solve? Just have another column where we can click?
14:32:11 Von Clara Marino an Alle:
Personally, as an eholdings user, I'm having trouble imagining searching agls by the equivalent to an agl number, since that would just be another number to remember that isn't any less arbitrary than the reference number
14:32:30 Von Zorian Sasyk | EBSCO FOLIO Implementation an Alle:
My initial thoughts are similar to Felix's
14:32:54 Von Gail Murray (she/her) an Alle:
I agree with Felix, but I do think some kind of numbering for AGLs would be very helpful when you have lots of AGLs on an AG and are trying to keep track of what you're looking at, and I don't like the idea of different numbering systems across apps, so mirroring the imperfect orders numbering makes the most sense to me.
14:35:31 Von Clara Marino an Alle:
Reacted to "I agree with Felix, ..." with 👍
14:41:31 Von Felix Hemme an Alle:
When you store it, then you would not have to make those calls at all.
14:41:49 Von Felix Hemme an Alle:
But maybe implement a function to refresh the data that is stored in Agreements
14:42:08 Von Felix Hemme an Alle:
In case data in eHoldings changes
14:43:57 Von Zorian Sasyk | EBSCO FOLIO Implementation an Alle:
Agreed, we can take it up in the eHoldings group
14:44:51 Von Jessica Harris an Alle:
I'm not seeing anyone's chat's here. Did the settings change to only allow moderators to view chats?
14:45:16 Von Clara Marino an Alle:
I can see other people's chats
14:45:18 Von Zorian Sasyk | EBSCO FOLIO Implementation an Alle:
I can see all chats
14:45:18 Von Gail Murray (she/her) an Alle:
I can see them too
14:45:50 Von Jessica Harris an Alle:
I think I may need to sign out & in again - I also can't unmute
14:45:54 Von Jessica Harris an Alle:
Be back in a sec
14:48:36 Von Clara Marino an Alle:
To be clear, even though I don't see much help to the agreement-agl numbering system as far as searching goes, I do agree with Gail (and Sara) that numbering on the agls in the agreements view would make it easier to keep track of what you're doing/something to click on
14:48:57 Von Clara Marino an Alle:
*be something reasonable to click on
14:50:31 Von Clara Marino an Alle:
Not a strongly held opinion, but I would be worried about the implications for agreements with large numbers of agls if they had persistent numbering
14:55:12 Von Felix Hemme an Alle:
Please just add +1 every time and leave gaps in between.
14:55:53 Von Felix Hemme an Alle:
What about a prefix? 10585 could otherwise be a PO number or an AGR number...
14:58:17 Von Felix Hemme an Alle:
Oh our term is nice! --> Vereinbarungskomponente-001 ;)
14:59:17 Von Clara Marino an Alle:
"Line 1"

Attendees list