2018-02-28 Strategic Partners

Blacklight Beta Update

Emily

• Not currently promoting the beta, just putting it out there for right now.

User Testing Sub-group

• starting to think about what research questions are and what we want to test

• looking specifically at things that can be tested and then acted upon prior to production release in late June

• Rachel is leading this group

Additional Development Prior to Production Release in June

• Emily meeting weekly with Chad to discuss priorities

• Most will be focused on key components not yet in beta

  • Primo Central Index - Article Index

  • CONTENTdm/Special Collections records integration

  • Record export options

  • Hopefully replace the iFrame that currently displays item information - Ex Libris just released an API that would allow us to break out of the box (literally)

  • Meeting with a group to think about request functionality

• May have others outside of LTD join sprints as needed to provide expertise

Solicit feedback from the library more broadly

• only want to solicit feedback that can be acted on

Metadata solutions

• related to facets and name/subject authority browsing

• working with Holly and Leanne

• talking with team at Cornell 

Search Relevance Rankings

• Will continue to build this out throughout the spring

• acknowledge another sub-group that has worked on search relevancy for known items

• but still discussing broader searching such as keyword, author, subject, etc.

Questions: 

1. Did Cornell do user testing?

   1. Not sure. We were primarily talking with developers.

   2. Cornell apparently has a rich UX environment there and have worked a lot of with personas.

   3. Nancy will contact Cornell

2. Summon index status?

   1. This is a rumor right now based on current staffing trends in the two projects - Summon UI and PCI staff are disappearing, implying that the two will be merged in some way

   2. Summon index and resulting API are superior to Primo, so this would be a benefit to us.

   3. Concern would be if they change the technical specs for integration

 User Testing

 Rachel

• First meeting was last week, next meeting was Feb 28, 2018 

• Emily is drafting a charter - we can share with this group

• Timing is an issue because we want to get it done by May 

Website 

Cynthia

Current Phase

• We are still in Phase 2, but Phase 3 has begun with some discussions of the infrastructure

Next step

• Start talking about governance and who will do what Website Editorial Roles and Procedures

• I've asked the Advisory group to think of their functional area and designate 1-3 people to serve as content contributors

• Once that group is formed, Emily will convene the group to begin looking at the content

• Up until now, the process for getting access to the website has been fairly informal.

  • I would like to formalize this process a bit more

  • Provide training opportunities

  • Want to look at the web environment holistically, LibGuides, Website, Blogs, etc.

  • Right now everything falls to Chris 

Content Description

• I want the content contributors to focus on five content types: buildings, spaces, groups, people, services

• The content contributors are going to begin looking at these five content types to: 

  • First, build out the list of things that need to be described. List of Entities

  • Then, begin describing each of the items

  • Opportunities exist to align descriptions across branch campuses or locations

• Recommendations: 

  • Possible do a mind map or engage staff with grouping and describing our services - lots of opportunities to engaging staff

  • Engage the newest staff to take part in the content review since they have the freshest perspective

  • Be aware of jargon and wording that is used on the website - maybe have a question mark glossary next to certain terms - also a good opportunity for testing

    • Come up with a list of terms that we think might be questionable and use these as a basis for testing

Development of policies and procedures

• This will be an iterative process, but will likely happen concurrently with the content review

• The two can happen simultaneously and inform each other

Questions

1. The content doesn't actually get published until the website goes live?

   1. Correct. We're not going to modify the content in Drupal. This process is building the content for the new website.

2. Will the content be peer reviewed at all?

   1. That is part of the policies and procedures that we need to outline. Web Environment Publishing Recommendations - DRAFT

3. If policies are going to be written over the summer, then what is the advisory group doing right now?

   1. Advisory group is designating content contributors

   2. Roles and responsibilities piece of the policies puzzle is farther along to provide some oversight to the content work that will happen this summer.

   3. Developing policies will be formalized in the summer, but this process will be informed by the work that will go on by the content group

4. What are the distinctions between what the Strategic Partners Group is doing and what the Content Contributors group will be doing?

   1. There may end up being a lot of overlap. And it may prove necessary to put the strategic partners group on a temporary hiatus while the content work is going on. This will remain to be seen.

5. Will the people from each branch who handle similar processes, for example, reserves, get together and discuss the content presented on the website?

   1. Yes! As we go through the content process, I want as much cross-branch collaboration as possible to either streamline content or identify and highlight differences.