|
SFX-Verde Group Home >
Minutes
10/26/2005
SFX/Verde Group
October 26th, 2005
Attending: Ellen Duranceau (co-chair), Millicent Gaskell, Nicole Hennig
(co-chair), Kim Maxwell, Beth Siers (minutes), Rich Wenger
- Primo demo
We talked over people's thoughts about the Primo demo we saw last week.
It doesn't quite do all of what we're talking about, but we're wondering
if the underlying machinery could be used to make our vision. Nicole liked
that they were really focus on user-centered design and wondered if we
could leverage some of that work to save us time. Ellen also reported
back on some follow-up she'd done with ExL. That the databases and E-journals
were intended for inclusion in the initial launch
(Q3 '06), unless their market research revealed a stonger problem to be
addresses. They envision thee-journal acces to be through the SFX KB combined
with MARCit, and that Verde info could be called upon for display. Databases
will be integrated through either MetaLib or (probably) Verde. They would
use the 'resource description' field sin MetaLib and the linking to them
would be resolved through SFX, but databases can't be from the SFX KB.
They are trying to structure things to reduce their multple points of
data entry. ExL is also thinking that the material types (such as identifing
some results as 'databases') wouldn't be on the opening screen, but that
the facets would guide the user to a specific material type. They are
also planning to do more usability testing for wording of the options.
ExL has offered us a ballpark guesstimate price, but cannot provide real
pricing at this time because they have some large questions still outstanding
as to whether they'll need to purchse any dictionaries, a 3rd-party search
engine, or a de-duping engine. they also see intergrating other types
of data (statistics, images, etc.) but much further down the road. We
also discussed the pluses and minuses of adding yet another ExL product
we'd be dependent on.
We brainstormed a bit on some the important factors we'd need to think
about when deciding about whether to choose Primo:
Costs
Library role
being bound to 1 company
priority vs. opportunity costs
- Verde training
Ellen Kim and Rich all attended the 2 days of Verde training held
earlier in the week. 4 big issues came up:
*How soon will the MetaLib KB be intergrated into the Verde/SFX
KB? Since the Verde data is being exposed through SFX, how do we expose
the Verde data for databases?
*We need more info on the SOAP services - their limits, how they work,
what's coming in the future. (They're thinking now it will be more preset
services, not very customizable)
*How soon will there be more/better display options for the 'i' button
information
*How soon will they offer more flexible querying of the KB? Right now
the staff interface is setup to only allow searching for a single thing,
we
need more of an 'advanced' search screen.
----ExL has promised us answers to these by Nov 7th
***With how Verde works right now, the only perceived benefit is the
reduction of data redundancy (which is hugely important).
Which means that choosing to implement Verde will really push us to option
1. Option 2 will mean a big loss of functionality for both users and
staff. (or at best an equal exchange for staff countingin the benefit
of
less data-redundancy)
Which means that choosing to implement Verde will really push us to option
1. We may need to delay an implementation until version 2, which suggests
that an immediate implementation of Verde and what we have been calling
Option 2 would mean a big loss of functionality for both users and staff.
(or at best an equal exchange for staff counting in
the benefit of less data-redundancy)
We then talked a while about how things might proceed if we have to wait
longer than anticipated to implement Verde. We could do the user needs
assesment now, and we'd be more effective in making decisions once we
know
what we were heading towards.
We could create list of parameters (e.g. modular system, open API)
We could influence how the tools are being built (e.g. be a development
partner) - especially if we can use a piece of software (e.g. Primo) and
build other pieces ourselves.
Which all led us to a sub-option of option 1: Do our user-assesment for
a
few months, and *then* choose UI approach (Primo vs. customize CDL vs.
develop
our own or some combination of these approaches)
We'd like to use things that are already built
We'd like to be in the forefront of innovation for users needs
The technology environment is now headed more and more towards letting
us
mix and match pieces
We find it hard to prove our vision is user-based without having done
the
user assesment
---another question: does Primo have an X-server?
- Estimating Costs
How to we go about making cost estimates for this? One idea was to
talk more with other institutions doing similar projects:
***Ellen will talk to CDL
***Nicole with talk to U of Rochester
*** Ellen will talk to NC State
We discussed the idea of coming up with a more detailed list of steps
involved in the project.
***Rich will draft a project list
Then we brainstormed a list of places we might save staff time once option
1 was implemented:
subject pages; library pages; other web savings?
OPAC customization
Interface improvements to Vera
Not maintaining Vera database:
server maintenance: Creek River
Staff Vera interface
data creation and maintenance
More automated workflows and efficiencies (including some of the web savings)
It will be easier to add new services and components
We talked about our who will represent us at the DLG/TSAC meeting:
Tracy Ellen and Nicole ; and possibly Rich
- User needs subgroup
The user needs subgroups shared with the group their list of goals and
questions. They're sketching out a plan for how to conduct the assesment,
and feel it can work into the WAG timeline for this year. The idea to
include a timeline for how the assessment would fit into the DLG/TSAC
presentation was met with approval.
|