2018-09-26 Meeting notes- Strategic Partners

Date

Sep 26, 2018

In attendance:

@David Lacy @Jackie Sipes @Katy Rawdon @Katherine Westbrook (Unlicensed) David Isom, @Nancy Turner@Rachel Cox (Unlicensed)@Cynthia Schwarz (Unlicensed)@Brian Boling@Gabe Galson

Agenda:

Entity wireframes will be presented to the group

Feedback will be collected.  

Wireframes for meeting discussion:

Open

Person Entity Page

Showing off the person entity page (librarian- another mockup may be created for a non-librarian person page).

Highlights:  Request an appointment button, Subject specialties box w/ values pulled in from entity metadata

Subject Specialties

Q: which controlled vocab to use in this box?  A: We’re leaning towards LOC

Concern:  the springshare CVs are different… is this an issue?  A: At the very least it’s a concern.

Q: What about including associated departments as LOC subjects associated with individual researchers.  Would this be possible? A:  These lists would have to be recorded manually.  If ITS is going to maintain this list then we could do this but if we’re obligated to maintain it ourselves, probably no.  
Q:  Can non-reference librarians be assigned a subject specialty?  A:  This should be possible, however it has to be done thoughtfully as the function of these, from a public facing perspective, is to connect users with a librarian who can help.  

Q:  Is this a professional profile?  That is, must it survey everyone’s professional duties accurately? A:  No, its a public-facing directory page.  As such there’s no obligation to list each individuals subject specialties, skills, etc. when they’re not available to the public.  

If someone has multiple affiliations (i.e. Jenny Pierce, affiliated with HSL and Paley) they will have two entity pages.   

Q:  Should we display staffers' strategic team affiliations on their profiles?  A: We could. Whether we should is an open question.

Breadcrumbs

Q: How will the breadcrumbs be affected by people with multiple affiliations?  A: It won’t, because the breadcrumb will go straight from people->person entity page… there’s no actual heirarchy so it’s not possible to reflect the

Open Question: Should we get rid of the breadcrumb?  In some ways it's lost value in that our structure is a graph not a flowchart. On the other hand it still has value in that it lets you go back to the top level directory.   

The ‘Person’s activity' section... a feed combining research guides, blogs and blog posts, exhibits and events, and committee memberships.  

Groups Entity page

Includes departments and strategic steering teams… no internal committees.  The use case for committees was Staff Council… As in this example there’s no point in carrying the listing of committees forward, as they’re not useful to patrons.  

Q: Committees… where does this go?  A: In Confluence

Q: AAL’s prominent presence… what will happen to this.  A: Currently their content is on a wordpress site. Could remain there, or go into confluence.   

• Cynthia discussed this with AAL several months ago, and everyone agreed that the presence on the website could be reduced.  

Q: What about diversity and inclusion committee, and other committees that dovetail with or support our mission statement? A: I might recommend having a blurb somewhere on the website about “Diversity and Inclusion” and could mention the presence of the committee. This could live on the “About” page.

No more physical address for each individual person, physical address is listed at the department level, due to Charles' consolidation of spaces

Buildings entity page

It makes more sense to rename the ‘buildings’ entity ‘libraries’.  In line with Alma practice. SCRC for example is physically located in Paley, but is its own library.  

• Note:  ‘Libraries’ are a distinct entity, separate from ‘Spaces’.  ‘Collections’ (i.e. browsing collection) is also a separate entity.  

• Note: Both Spaces and Buildings can be linked to separate hours values.  Ginsburg innovation lab for example, has separate hours from the larger library.  

Services entity page

Still a rough draft

Cynthia feels these could use some UX testing.  

Uses dropdown menus rather than boxes- a design departure

Open Q: Are the filters necessary and useful on this page?  As they’re used the changing options available to the user are concealed behind the dropdown- a potential usability issue.

Microsites: Cynthia’s reviewing them with stakeholders this week.  

Other features

Design Q:  Should the box titles be above or below the text pulled in from entity metadata?  A:  above. Wireframes can be redone, chris can hopefully change course on the homepage coding.   

Preview of bento results… a facet would appear next to results feed, allowing one to limit by research guides, website, blog and blog posts, exhibits and events, staff directory, etc.  

Persistence of search option… should it be built into the teal bar listing the microsite names?  The topnav?