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

[Terran McCanna]

PINES is also in favor of a staff visibility flag that is separate from the
OPAC-visibility flag.

On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 7:12 PM Jason Stephenson via Evergreen-general <
evergreen-general at list.evergreen-ils.org> wrote:

> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Evergreen-general mailing list
> Evergreen-general at list.evergreen-ils.org
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-general
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/pipermail/evergreen-general/attachments/20240123/e99377ae/attachment.htm>