2023-01-30 Resource Access Meeting Notes

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

Cornelia Awenius 

julie.bickle 

David Bottorff 

Elizabeth Chenette 

Holly Mistlebauer 

(OLD ACCOUNT) Erin Nettifee 

Andrea Loigman 

Kristina Dorrough 

Karen White 

Lara Moch (Unlicensed) 

Mark Canney 

Kimie Kester 

Nina Morgenstern 

@Paivi Rentz

lisa perchermeier 

Erin Weller 

Tobi Hines 

Laurence Mini 

Laszlo Jakusovszky 

Amelia Sutton 

Kara Hart 

Brooks Travis 

Molly Driscoll 

Rebecca Pernell 

Jana Freytag 


Discussion Items:

Time

Item

Who

Description

Goals/Info/notes

5min

Administrivia


30Min

Patron notices to proxy

UXPROD-3937 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  • For scheduled notices: Should the notice be linked to the recepient (i.e. proxy) immediately when the notice is created? Or should the recipient be determined just before sending the notice, in case the proxy-sponsor relationship changes after the scheduled notice is created?
  • This setting affects ALL notices tied to that loan or request, i.e. loan, requests and fee/fine notices. Is this ok?
  • When looking in the circ log: Do you need to know that this notice was sent to the proxy, rather than to the sponsor?
Discussion in Slack: https://folio-project.slack.com/archives/C3G05TF3R/p1671631875497839
25minFuture fees/finesHolly Mistlebauer 

Please add your priorities, comments and questions to https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/147XgutIUxeAOfiREcX81sNnfepB6sSL4MqSnqkuLKhs/edit#gid=0

A simple 1-5 ranking system (1=most important, 5=least urgent)  suffices.

Holly closed some features as no longer needed or duplicates. See comments in the "Notes from meeting of 1/23" column". SIG members encouraged to look over features and comment if they think a closed feature is still something they want.

Option if there is timeUI: Show columns on Fee/fines option

You can deselect all columns in the fee/fine screens:

Question for the group: Should at least one column be fix (can't be deselected)? Which column(s) should that be?

Descision : the columns fee/fine type and billed will be the ones that can't be deselected

Meeting Notes

1. Julie led a discussion about Patron Notices on Proxy Accounts. 

Currently, the UI allows notices to be sent to Sponsor or Proxy but that choice does not work on the backend. Notices only go to the sponsor currently. Is it worth the development time to get notices to go to proxy? Should the proxy recieve all notices or just those the proxy initiated?

Some sites want all notices to go to Proxy always. Others want a choice: sponsor only, proxy only, sponsor and proxy. This setting affects ALL notices tied to that loan or request, i.e. loan, requests and fee/fine notices. Is this ok? In regards Fee/Fines there may be some who want those to go to sponsor. It seems we want maximum flexibility. It was suggested the notification choices could be selected when the proxy sponsor relationship is set up and being able to customize that by the user.

For scheduled notices: Should the notice be linked to the recepient (i.e. proxy) immediately when the notice is created? Or should the recipient be determined just before sending the notice, in case the proxy-sponsor relationship changes after the scheduled notice is created? The relationship could expire at any time so it seems we would need a status check before the notices are queued.

When looking in the circ log: Do you need to know that this notice was sent to the proxy, rather than to the sponsor? Yes, the more information the better in the logs.

2. Kimie asked about closed Fee/Fines. Currently all columns are optional; it is possible to deselect them all. Should we have sticky columns always open? Yes, it was suggested the columns "ff type" and "billed" be used. 

3. Holly led a discussion about Fee/Fine Issues Priorities. Holly will average the responses and note if a feature is a blocker for any sites (even if an overall average is low).

Should we close features where all votes are P4/P5? That would help us get our features to a more manageable list. There's certainly nothing wrong with leaving them out there with a very low priority. Because there might be a library that comes along and is reading through these, and is like, Oh, yeah, we really need this, you know, or I didn't know folio didn't do that.