2024-05-13 Resource Access Meeting Notes - Open discussion round
Date
Recordings
Find all recordings here: https://recordings.openlibraryfoundation.org/folio/resource-access-sig/ (pw: folio-lsp)
Zoom
https://zoom.us/j/337279319 (pw: folio-lsp)
Attendees
Discussion Items:
Time | Item | Who | Description | Goals/Info/notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5Min | Administrivia |
Next topics/call for participation:
| Note taker: Magnus Andersson Bound with UI in circ apps will be a topic at the 10th of June meeting. Jana will check with the German resource access SIG for feedback. | |
| 20 Min | Fee/fine from previous loan is blocked from actions when item is checked out again and claimed returned | Thomas Trutt | UIU-3125 - Getting issue details... STATUS | |
| 30Min | Discussion round | all | possible topics:
|
Meeting Notes
Discussion UIU-3125
- Fee/fines on one patron's account should not affect another patron’s loans or fees/fines.
- Charlotte said that there are some extra complications because of how reminder fees work.
- Question was asked if it the option to use claim returned should differ if an item is declared lost by the system or by staff.
- There is a claimed returns report in the Users app: Users > Actions > Claimed returned report (CSV). Another option is to check item status in Inventory.
- Ways to resolve a loan that is claimed returned: Declare lost (fees are added) or mark as missing (fees are not added)
- Group agreed that if a loan is open, or closed with status Lost and paid, claims returned should be allowed for that loan. If a loan has been checked in and is closed claims returned should not be allowed. If an item has been lost on Patron A’s account, returned, and then loaned out to patron B who does a claims return, it should not affect patron A, or vice versa.
Anonymization claimed returned
- Magnus brought up that when they marked a claimed returned item as missing the loan did not get anonymized automatically. They had to do a manual anonymization. He will test it again and create a jira if there is still a bug.
Should requests that are in the process of fulfillment expire?
- Laurence brought up that in documentation it says that all requests will get status Closed – Unfilled after the request expiration date passes. He tested and requests that are Open – Awaiting pickup does not get closed. The group agrees that this behavior is fine. (Documentation has been updated for Quesnelia.)
- Discussed how Open – In transit and Open – Awaiting delivery should interact with the request expiration date. Laurence has also looked into those statuses and the requests get closed in those cases. Group seemed in agreement that Open – Awaiting delivery should not be closed, but opinions differed on Open – In transit.
- Laurence will tell Stephanie that requests not expiring when they have status Open - awaiting pickup behavior is fine (request will be closed when shelf expiration date passed) and that the group wants to discuss preferred behavior for Open - Awaiting delivery and Open - In transit.
Default expration date
- Thomas brought up the ticket for Default expiration date and asked if anyone is still interested. There is some interest for it in the group even if it’s not high priority functionality.