CBB UX Committee Meeting Minutes – December 2, 2015

CBB UX meeting, December 2, 2015 (Colby)
Meeting notes (JRM)

  1. Updates from Proquest visit and CBB Governing Board
  2. Board meeting:
  • CBB is considering the use of either ConnectNY or the Boston Library Consortium as an alternative to NExpress. A group led by Sharon Saunders is investigating the technical integration issues involved in adopting BLC borrowing and WorldCat Local. There may be a role for our group for reviewing the user experience of the public interfaces. Judy will relate our interest to the Board.
  • This led to discussion on changing the current 400 error message that appears when information from a bib record is not transferable to INNReach. Carr agreed to look at this and Laine to suggest some language.
  • As we plan our team priorities we should keep in mind that we are in the third year of our III contract. Is it the right time to consider III’s mobile capacity, Encore, etc?
  1. Proquest visit:
  • Jane Burke from Proquest demoed Consortial ERM which is part of Intota as well as the new 360 Link 2.0 (which Bates has already implemented and Bowdoin will implement in January). CBB is getting pricing on Consortial ERM.
  • Jane also reported that they are developing a resource sharing service, to be available by Q2 2017, which would simplify borrowing for the user. User would enter their requests which will be sent to the best resource sharing option (e.g. NExpress, MaineCat, ILL via Illiad, etc.). Simplifying user choice is on our committee to-do list.

 

  1. Colby Bento box beta: Darylyne shared the url to the new beta Bento-box approach search they are using for Summons to go live in Jan. Colby used a contractor for this work. Darylyne will find out if she can share the coding. Bowdoin is beginning an investigation of doing the same in the spring semester.
  2. Project updates:
  3. New book list: Karl demoed our old and new list implementations, noting that the biggest challenge/difference is that we are now pulling call numbers from item records rather than bib record as in the past. Mike McDermott is working ways to dedupe the list. We plan to tailor the old script so can use PHP rather than PERL.
  • Subject: we can use LC class numbers.TO DO: By Jan. 20 each library reviews the current list of subjects and their call number range mapping to decide which are needed or can be discontinued, what new subjects make sense and to make sure that the call number range are correct.
  • Bates has a few interdisciplinary subjects that were based on fund codes in order record. Since the move to CBBcat, we are limited to using only one library’s fund codes for this. Pete will check to see if these subjects are still necessary.
  • Will add limit by subject and format, not one or the other as in the past.
  • Pete wondered if users could search based on call number ranges they create themselves. Karl will investigate the level of work this would take.
  • Formats: TO DO: review list for changes including additions. Can choose from formats used as scopes or as a material type limiter under “modify search”.
  • In the past no e-resources were included in list. The group discussed this at length. Many e-books have no call number or brief records. Might we change our practice and include call numbers in an alternative call # local field? Karl is investigating this with System group. He will also look into whether we could choose to have only records with call numbers show as results. Pete would like to surface Springer titles from SS records. Others would like Oxford and Cambridge titles, those publisher collections in our DDAs or purchased, as well as streaming music and videos. Requires further investigation.
  • Language list: TO DO review list for new languages Should we use the list up to “Afar” that is employed in advanced search?
  • Location: We cannot include limit by sub-locations in this first round of development. Might we change the label “location” to “campus” or “college”?
  • Received in the last: Shall we use one day, 1 week, 1 month and three months? How about changing the limiter label to “Added in the last:”?
  • Sort by: title, author, call number. Shall we add “date added”?; “by format?
  • Output: web page, RSS, printer friendly format, emails will work. Karl is still working on implementing email alerts which all agree is a high priority. This portion of the page needs to be designed and language simplified. We can discuss ideas at our next meeting.
  1. Export to Endnote: Pete, Christine and Karl had not met but done some individual exploration. They agree we do not have any good options. Perhaps Encore would provide this functionality.
  2. Moving the CBBrequest button: We’ll go live with the current icon and language on Jan. 4.
  3. Design of right-hand column and choice of content for initial implementation: All agreed we need to have a broader philosophical discussion on our use of this area at our next meeting before making the ILL decisions. Darylyne asked if we could have Pathfinder Pro on our bib. but not results screens. Karl will check.
  • Some possible options for this space are ILL language, Cite this, libguides, Google Books preview,
  • ILL discussion: we would lose passthru of bib data to ILL forms if we use a secondary page. Pete would like to revisit discussion on inclusion of ConnectNY in this area after NExpress alterative is decided
  1. Location information and mapping:Thanks to Laine for supplying sample language. The group decided that it was not necessary to be consistent but that we will share our decisions and any map development with each other. Libraries might choose to use pop-up window or outside links, but Karl noted that each library will need to supply to him links/pop-up content for each of their locations. He will find out if status can be linked (Colby uses status for locations sometime). Anchors can be used. This item is complete. Libraries will work on at their own pace.
  2. Virtual shelf investigation: Not discussed-for our Feb agenda
  3. Spring work list:
  4. review items under consideration; (FYI: in voting earlier this year, we identified usability testing, mobile user interface to catalog, simply II choices, single sign-on as our next priorities.-for our Feb. agenda
  5. Gathering library staff feedback on CBBcat and issue to address-for our Feb agenda
  6. Usability testing-Darlyne will prepare and lead kick-off discussion at our Feb. meeting.

Next meeting:

  • Project updates:
    • New Books list: updates and make final subject, format, etc. decisions; discuss output and results pages.
    • 400 error message
  • Philosophy of use of right-hand column and next steps: ILL and other
  • Usability testing: Darylyne will lead preliminary discussion
  • Setting up guidelines for CBB UX pilot projects
  • Update on NExpress alternative project

Spring project priorities