[Evergreen-catalogers] Angular staff client catalog

[Janet Schrader]

Hi,
I looked at this a while ago and didn't think it was that bad as I really
want catalogers to view the MARC record instead of the current OPAC
display. I don't remember where I saw it. Can someone please supply that
link again if you have it.



Thanks,
Janet


Janet Schrader

Bibliographic Services Supervisor | CW MARS

67 Millbrook Street, Suite 201, Worcester, MA 01606

P: 508-755-3323 x 325 | F: 508-757-7801

------------------------------

jschrader at cwmars.org  ||  http;//cwmars.org <http://www.cwmars.org/>



On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:32 PM Mary Llewellyn <mllewell at biblio.org> wrote:

> We're a long way from there, but I just looked at it on a community
> server, and I can see why the catalogers are unhappy. We've spent a lot of
> time adding to our bib record display (it was pretty bare bones back circa
> 2010-2011), and this view is even worse, just the record summary. I suppose
> they could make the MARC view their default view, but my catalogers are
> used to being able to see all the descriptive cataloging in the OPAC view
> and any attached items at the same time. This looks like it will make their
> lives a little harder.
>
> Mary
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:04 PM Thomsen, Elizabeth <et at noblenet.org>
> wrote:
>
>> How are people feeling about the Angular staff catalog?  Have you shown
>> it to library staff?  We have 3.3 on a test server and this morning we
>> turned on the Experimental Catalog to showed to our catalogers for
>> feedback.  They were really unhappy with it.  They value having the staff
>> and patron views of the catalog match, and they want to see the full view
>> of the bibliographic record whether they are determining whether or not the
>> record is a match for an item they are inputting, or looking at record they
>> added from a workform or Z39.50 to spot and correct problems.
>>
>> The grid only has a few pieces of information from the bibliographic
>> records that are useful in terms of matching the record to the item in hand
>> -- the author, the title, the year and the edition statement, if any.  No
>> format, publisher, description, ISBN, no links to other formats and
>> editions, no cover image.  I appreciate that they added a link to *View
>> in Catalog*, which takes you outside the staff client to the public
>> catalog, but that seems very cumbersome for something people are going to
>> have to do for practically every record.  And won't public service people
>> have all the same problems looking up records for patrons to place holds?
>>
>> I understand the need to Angularize this, and appreciate the work that's
>> gone into it.  There's a lot I like here in terms of the UI, but with this
>> sparse display of the bib record, it looks like a real step backward to us.
>>
>> --
>> Elizabeth B. Thomsen
>> Member Services Manager
>> NOBLE: North of Boston Library Exchange
>> Danvers, Mass.
>> www.noblenet.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evergreen-catalogers mailing list
>> Evergreen-catalogers at list.evergreen-ils.org
>>
>> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-catalogers
>>
>
>
> --
> Mary Llewellyn
> Database Manager
> Bibliomation, Inc.
> 24 Wooster Ave.
> Waterbury, CT 06708
> mllewell at biblio.org
> _______________________________________________
> Evergreen-catalogers mailing list
> Evergreen-catalogers at list.evergreen-ils.org
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-catalogers
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/pipermail/evergreen-catalogers/attachments/20190918/975dfa1a/attachment.html>