2020-02-13 Resource Access Meeting Notes

Owned by Andrea Loigman
Last updated: Feb 13, 2020 by Brooks TravisVersion comment
2 min read

Date

Attendees


Discussion Items

TimeItemWhoDescriptionGoals
5minHousekeeping Andrea Loigman
20minPatron blocksBjörn MuschallLeipzig is suggesting preset values/descriptions for patron blocks
10minFine/fee ownerCate Boerema (Deactivated)Follow up on email discussion about lost item fee/fine owner when resource is in remote storageWould folks expect the fee/fine owner to be the remote storage facility or the owning library?

Context: This has implications for the remote storage integration. Namely, when an item is added to remote storage, how it its location changed? Is the item location changed (which would result in a change to the item effective location) or is the holdings permanent location changed (which we are now saying would determine the lost item fee/fine owner)?
10minInventoryCate Boerema (Deactivated)Follow up on requests popup in inventoryCurrent mockup: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1OWbOzdhw6nHsjcOCI4J3PmXKEhpkYpWr2k1NtRWDu68/edit#slide=id.g6eaa6a4a69_1_12

Questions:
1. Do people prefer the "View requests" link in the Actions menu or as a button on the page (e.g. as shown in slide 6)? I am getting mixed feedback.
2. If there are no requests on any items in the instance, should the option be disabled or do you want to be able to open the popup even when there are no requests?
3. "Volume" and "Year, Caption" have now been added to the item list in FOLIO: https://folio-snapshot.aws.indexdata.com/inventory/view/69640328-788e-43fc-9c3c-af39e243f3b7?query=aba&sort=Title Do these columns need to be added to the popup, as well? There is limited real estate for additional columns in the popup, but does it feel odd to have some enumeration data displaying and not other?


Meeting Outcomes

Functional Area

Product Owner

Planned Release (if known)

Decision Reached

ReasoningLink to supporting materials

Comments

e.g. loans, fees/finesNamee.g. Q4 2018, Q1 2019Clearly stated decision
  • Because...
  • Because...
e.g. mock-up, JIRA issue


Notes 

  1. Bjorn: Pre-set values for patron blocks
    1. Marked as last missing feature for Leipzig in Users App.
    2. Proposal on Patron Block Customizable Presets
    3. Pre-set blocking settings: Slide 3
    4. Create block from preset: Slide 4
    5. Proposal: Additional Block Action for user self-management (self-edit patron profile), Slide 5
    6. Requirement: Block import via API: Slide 6
    7. Discussion:
      1. Why wasn’t this done before?
      2. How do we separate them in the UI?
        1. Concatenate with automatic vs. separate panes/accordions
        2. Nothing to show for automated blocks right now.
      3. Brief look at blocks as they stand
      4. General consensus on pre-set blocks as a good idea.
      5. Add self-edit block.
        1. Freeze user record as alternative? - needs to prioritize, not in MVP: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UXPROD-242
        2. Just a custom block that discovery can interpret and block patron action?
      6. Action: Submit feature to Holly for write-up.
  2. Fee/fine owner discussion:
    1. <agenda>
    2. Discussion: Consensus around fee/fine owner as HPL
  3. Requests pop-up:
    1. Actions menu vs. link in pane.
      1. UX Testing (A/B) opportunity
    2. Take-away:
      1. Consensus to put action button in menu
      2. Push on performance issues with Dev for request counts
      3. Additional new enumeration included in requests table?
        1. Consensus: No.
    3. Additional concern about performance with high-count volume holdings. - Cheryl
    4. Erin - Captions info: https://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/conser/conserhold/Captabbr.html
      1. Include? - Consensus continues to be NOT to include it in the popup table.

**Note from Brooks: Sorry for the lack of names next to most of the discussion items.