[Evergreen-general] Sharing plans for changing library selector in Angular staff catalog

[Jason Stephenson]

Hi, all.

On 1/22/24 17:57, Lussier, Kathy via Evergreen-general wrote:
> Thanks Galen.
> 
> It sounds like an option is in order then, and I'm now wondering if a 
> global flag is appropriate or something that allows us to determine 
> staff catalog visibility on an OU by OU basis.

We talked about this internally at C/W MARS and thought that a field for 
staff catalog visibility on the org. unit would be appropriate.

HtH,
Jason

> 
> Yes, NOBLE has OUs that left the consortium that are completely disused. 
> Another issue is that, in Massachusetts, we have very few multi-branch 
> libraries. Displaying a system level and the branch level in the catalog 
> search selector is redundant for all but four of our libraries. We also 
> need an org unit for our statewide sharing system, which is not 
> something that gets searched. There may be some other use cases, but, 
> overall, we've found it very useful to have control over how the org 
> units display in that specific library selector.
> 
> Kathy
> --
> Kathy Lussier
> she/her
> Executive Director
> NOBLE: North of Boston Library Exchange
> Danvers, MA
> 978-777-8844 x201
> www.noblenet.org <http://www.noblenet.org>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 5:46 PM Galen Charlton <gmc at equinoxoli.org 
> <mailto:gmc at equinoxoli.org>> wrote:
> 
>     Hi,
> 
>     On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 12:09 PM Lussier, Kathy via
>     Evergreen-general <evergreen-general at list.evergreen-ils.org
>     <mailto:evergreen-general at list.evergreen-ils.org>> wrote:
>      > #2 introduces new behavior that hasn't been used in previous staff
>      > catalogs. We could not think of a use case where an org unit
>      > should be invisible in the public catalog when performing a
>      > search, but should be visible in the staff catalog search. However,
>      >  if there is one, let us know so that we can add an option,
>      > most likely a global flag.
> 
>     I can think of several:
> 
>     - Library joining a consortium. Most any migration workflow I can
>     imagine will result in a period of at least a few days, and
>     sometimes longer, where an OU exists and has holdings attached to it
>     but shouldn't be visible in the OPAC, but where staff nonetheless
>     need to be able to do staff-side searches limited to that OU.
>     - Library opening a new branch with an opening day collection. This
>     could lead to an even longer period where the OU exists but is not
>     yet ready to be visible to patrons
>     - An explicitly hidden or resource collection
> 
>     Does NOBLE have OUs that are completely disused?
> 
>     Regards,
> 
>     Galen
>     --
>     Galen Charlton
>     Implementation and IT Manager
>     Equinox Open Library Initiative
>     gmc at equinoxOLI.org
>     https://www.equinoxOLI.org <https://www.equinoxOLI.org>
>     phone: 877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
>     direct: 770-709-5581
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evergreen-general mailing list
> Evergreen-general at list.evergreen-ils.org
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-general