2025-05-05 Resource Access Meeting Notes

📄 Meeting Minutes

🗣️ Discussion Points:

1. Introduction and Announcements (11:01 - 11:03)

   • Susan opened the meeting and introduced the agenda.
   • Amelia was introduced to discuss request anonymization.

2. Request Anonymization Overview (11:03 - 11:07)

   • Amelia presented the user stories for the request anonymization feature.
   • Key points included the anonymization functionality, handling of proxy information, and retention of patron group information.

3. Detailed Discussion on Anonymization (11:07 - 11:20)

   • Discussion on Patron Group and Department Information (11:07 - 11:11)
     • David raised concerns about the patron group and department information in the request record.
     • Amelia clarified that patron group information would be retained, but department information might not be included.
   • Fees and Fines Associated with Requests (11:11 - 11:20)
     • David questioned the need to retain request information if associated with fees or fines.
     • Consensus was that anonymizing the requester should not impact the loan or fee fine records.

4. UI and Settings for Anonymization (11:20 - 11:35)

   • Automated Anonymization Settings (11:20 - 11:28)
     • Amelia showed mockups for automated anonymization settings, similar to loan anonymization settings.
     • Discussion on default settings and the need for a default selection.
   • Manual Anonymization (11:28 - 11:35)
     • Amelia presented mockups for manual anonymization of single requests and search results.
     • Discussion on the placement of the anonymize option in the UI and the importance of user control.

5. Permissions and Use Cases (11:35 - 11:45)

   • Permissions for Anonymization (11:35 - 11:40)
     • Discussion on whether separate permissions are needed for single record and search result anonymization.
   • Use Cases for Manual Anonymization (11:40 - 11:45)
     • David and others discussed potential use cases for manual anonymization, including user requests for anonymization.

6. Development Priorities and Timeline (11:45 - 11:50)

   • Development Order (11:45 - 11:48)
     • Discussion on whether to prioritize manual or automated anonymization.
     • Consensus leaned towards starting with automated anonymization due to GDPR requirements.
   • Coordination with Development Teams (11:48 - 11:50)
     • Anne suggested meeting with Vega developers to refine the concepts and timeline.

✅ Decisions Made:

• Retain patron group information in the request record after anonymization.
• Prioritize automated anonymization development due to GDPR requirements.
• Separate permissions for single record and search result anonymization.

📌 Action Items:

• Amelia to discuss with developers which patron group fields to retain.
• Kimie to update mockups to reflect the retention of patron group information.
• Amelia to add default selection for anonymization settings.
• Anne to coordinate a meeting with Vega developers for further refinement.

📊 Data & Insights:

• Patron group information is stored in two places in the request record, which needs clarification on which to retain.
• Automated anonymization is critical for GDPR compliance, especially for European libraries.

🔄 Follow-Up:

• Meeting with Vega developers to refine the anonymization concepts and timeline.
• Further discussion on the possibility of users opting out of anonymization policies.

🐝 JIRAs:

• JIRA:12345 – Request Anonymization (Feature)

💻 Related Projects:

• Loan Anonymization