2019-09-23 Reporting SIG Meeting notes

2019-09-23 Reporting SIG Meeting notes

Date

Sep 23, 2019

Attendees

Present?

Name

Organization

Present?

Name

Organization

Present?

Name

Organization

Present?

Name

Organization

x

Sharon Beltaine

Cornell University

x

Sara Colglazier

Mount Holyoke College/Five Colleges

 

Elizabeth Berney

Duke University

 

Erin Nettifee

Duke University

 

Joyce Chapman

Duke University

 

Karen Newbery

Duke University

 

Elizabeth Edwards

University of Chicago

x

Tod Olson

University of Chicago

 

Claudius Herkt-Januschek

SUB Hamburg

x

Scott Perry

University of Chicago

x

Doreen Herold

Lehigh University

 

Stefan Stadtherr

MPIL Heidelberg

 

Anne L. Highsmith

Texas A&M

x

Simona Tabacaru

Texas A&M

 

Harry Kaplanian

EBSCO

x

Kevin Walker

The University of Alabama

x

Ingolf Kuss

hbz

 

Charlotte Whitt

Index Data

 

Lina Lakhia

SOAS

x

Andi Bihler

Munich Technical University Library

 

Joanne Leary

Cornell University

 

Uschi Klute

GBV

x

Michael Patrick

The University of Alabama

 

Vandana Shah

Cornell University

 

Nassib Nassar

Index Data

x

Angela Zoss

Duke University

 

Veit Köppen

University Magdeburg

 

Lisa DeCarolis

Smith College/Five Colleges

x

Linda Miller

Cornell University

x

Elena O'Malley

Emerson

 

Matt Harrington

Duke University

     

Holly Mistlebauer

Cornell University

x

Jean Pajerek

Cornell University

 

 

 


Discussion Items

Item

Who

Notes

Item

Who

Notes

Attendance

Sharon

Today's Attendance Taker: 

Today's notetaker:  Angela Zoss

Last week's notetaker: Vandana Shah

Review of Non-Clustered RA Reports

Angela

Angela will walk us through a review of Resource Access reports that did not fit into a cluster category. 

See the list at:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mS6nuvUhdxwzj3xXFOPjlc4iiV5xhH4n05a5ZloZb5g/edit#gid=0

RA clusters have been uploaded to the Google drive. Next step was to create UXPROD issues in JIRA to represent each cluster. Each issue shows the reports included in each cluster, sorted by cluster labels. The po-mvp labels indicate that at least one inquisition needs this at go-live. Good news is that only half of the clusters in RA are needed at go-live. This will help with prioritization. Originally 100 reports had been added to the RA master sheet. Only 50 reports were clustered, as the remaining did not fit into any RA clusters. For example, reports on batch jobs - these could be moved elsewhere. Also some need to be pushed back into in-app.

Note: How current does the data for a given "real-time" report really need to be? Currently we are recording the need for current data as a simple "real-time" yes-or-no, and using this to decide whether a report is in-app or LDP. As we move towards planing operations, this seems to be too narrow. At UChicago, for example, discussions of real-time reports reveal that many reports could use information that is updated more than nightly, but hour or every fifteen minutes or a few minutes, are common and relatively few "real-time" reports really need to be up-to-the-second. Capturing some of this nuance could open up some possibilities as we are deciding whether how to provide a report. Additional possibilities could include selective updating of tables during the day, providing a framework for light scripting outside of the LDP, and there may be others. If we have more nuanced information about the requirements for current data, we would have a more realistic view of the needs of the report and possibilities for providing it.

Metadata Management Report Cluster Review

Vandana

Vandana will walk us through her analysis of Metadata Management reports to create clusters.

 

See the list at:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1M_3aJG9pt41ayWn-0w6XtyRfNkV435Fuev6ocMzL6c8/edit#gid=889298050

 

Additional Topics?

All 

 

Topics for Future Meetings

All

Review and update Topics for Future Reporting SIG Meetings 

 

Action items

Reporting Data Privacy to follow up with Jesse, Tod, and Cate, and Chair-Elect to determine approach to audit trails in LDP