Cataloging User Group Fall 2005 Minutes

1. Opening remarks.
   Edward Swanson opened the meeting. List passed around for recording those present.
   
   
2. Recorder
   A recorder was needed; Bobby Bothmann volunteered.
   
   
3. Adopt Agenda
   No additional items for the agenda.
   
   
4. Approve Spring 2005 Minutes
   1. There was a question about 5.h. in the minutes:
      "The authority task force will deal with the issues of providing a mechanism for reporting and tracking authority display and functionality issues (work plan #272 - priority of 4)." It was noted that the reporting mechanism should be changed.
   2. For item 4. b in the spring minutes, the representative for state government was not filled. The position had been filled. Mary Ann Greenwald sent out the following notice: Kathy Malec, Pollution Control Agency, is the State Government representative on the Cataloging Steering Committee. Her term expires in 2007.
   3. Tess Kasling moved to accept minutes with changes noted. Adam Marsnik seconded, motion carried.
      
      
5. PALS Report Edward Swanson asked for questions about PALS Report.
   1. Question about Item 12: local tags survey. 50 libraries have not responded, 2nd request will come out soon, libraries are encouraged to respond. This information will be used for updating the Aleph cataloging module's validation functions.
   2. question about netLibrary 4 package.
   3. Clarification of the indexing of the ADM record; serial notes migrated to the ADM record from PALS; this library is not indexed; instructions on p.9-10 of the PALS report, also in the ehelp desk, for indexing the XXX50 library to find migrated PALS serial record notes.
   4. Reviewed the MnPALS Work Plan.
      • #132 is first one that is cataloging-related; CCLA in Florida is exporting bib records to OCLC; process uses p_export_02, which can only be done in Aleph bib format, not MARC21 format; Also #262 on the plan is the same problem.
      • #236 Acceptance testing for version 17; this has been completed because MnLINK decide to test only ILL and Booking
      • #239: testing Aleph Report Center (ARC); noted that ARC doesn't do much for cataloging; only indexes XXX50 library, mainly item record data; Ex Libris and CCLA may partner to rewrite ARC to have more capabilities for cataloging needs
      • #244 Learn implications for architecture change; example, mistyping the username causes problems; single alephe can't separate on OWN code for any of the services, so will run a service for all library own codes; Becky Bell stated that the MnPALS and U of MN architectures are so different that it doesn't matter if we're ever on the same version.
      • #284, arrange for testing SYS60 templates before removing them from the server; recommendation to remove the server templates at the last UG meeting. The reliable pattern templates have been identified; PALS report says incorrect ones will be deleted; rest will be removed and placed on a Web site; in process but no expected date has been announced for the work.
      • #246 maintenance agreement: waiting for a response from Ex Libris to inform us how they are going to respond; the agreement will include resolving problems
        
        
      Bobby Bothmann raised a question about the Work Plan, the priority column vs. the effort/target date column. Comments on the Work Plan were that PALS should put migration of all libraries as the number one priority on the Work Plan, because it is not there. Also that there are too many priority ones on the Work Plan that see no action, and that the effort/target date column has no dates in it.
      
      Adam Marsnik moved that a new column for target date to be added to the Work Plan. Bobby Bothmann seconded.
      
      Motion: Have PALS add realistic expected target dates for each item on the Work Plan. Discussion: Move all "expected in version 17" items to priority two on the Work Plan; Add migrating libraries as priority one, move everything else down to priority two and let each UG identify a few issues for PALS support to work on as priority one, in addition to the migrating of libraries.
      Voice vote held. Majority voted yes to the motion. There were no dissenting votes.
      
      
6. NAAUG Enhancements:
   All enhancements marked 1, 2, and 3 were accepted by Ex Libris. No discussion needed.
   
   
7. MnLINK User Group Meeting.
   Discussion of MnLINK involvement moved to the end of the meeting.
   
   
8. Task Force Reports
   1. Bobby Bothmann presented the Indexing Task Force (MITF) Report with recommendations for the User Group to consider which address the problems and issues list the task force is working with. Some of the issues were discussed at the last User Group meeting where PALS told the User Group that the task force should look into the issues and prepare possible changes for the re-indexing opportunity in fall 2005. Becky Bell stated that PALS would probably not have the time to make all of the changes presented by the MITF during the next round of reindexing. MITF members questioned why the group was doing work charged by the User Group and PALS support and was not being told that PALS support would not be able to do the work as had been anticipated. Becky clarified that the major problem just now is that MnPALS had not yet had an opportunity to analyze the proposed changes, particularly those related to the new Minnesota indexing standards, and that this is not a reluctance to make the changes but a factor of the time available before beginning the reindexing.
      Adam Marsnik moved that all of the MITF recommendations be brought to User Council and be placed as high priority on the Work Plan. Jane Young seconded
      Voice vote held: Majority voted yes. There were no dissenting votes.
      
      Monica Ralston moved that the User Group urge the User Council to fully support the MITF recommendations and that the MITF recommendations be implemented on Lute before reindexing. Adam Marsnik seconded the motion.
      Voice vote held: Majority voted yes. There were no dissenting votes.
      
      The MITF report had a motion to select option two of two options for indexing and accessing series titles. The motion was seconded by Adam Marsnik.
      Voice vote held: Majority voted yes. There were no dissenting votes.
      
      Bobby Bothmann asked about the continuance of the MATF because MITF needs the MATF to complete some of its work. Kathleen Daniels reported that the reference group has discussed MATF and the MATF will be meeting soon, and noted that Carol Johnson did a lot of work on the task force.
      
      The User Group formally thanked the MITF for all of the work it has done.
      
      
   2. Stephanie McConnell presented the Validation Task Force report. She noted that some of the validation tables have been rewritten and are in the queue, but no date has been set for when these rewrites will be on the server and that PALS has given the rewrites a low priority.
      
      Bobby Bothmann moved that the rewrites be placed on the Work Plan with a reasonable appropriate priority. Tess Kasling seconded.
      Discussion: The User Group felt that the rewrites to the validation tables should be implemented on Harp as the task force completes a table, and that these changes should be implemented with a few weeks of completion and submission to PALS support.
      Voice vote held: Majority voted yes. There were no dissenting votes.
      
      The User Group formally thanked the validation group for the work it has done.
      
      
   3. Anne Levin presented the Authorities Task Force report. The task force will go ahead and submit changes for immediate implementation on Harp as changes are completed.
      
      The User Group formally thanked the authorities task force for a good job.
      
      
   4. Monica Ralston and Sheila Hatchell presented an update on the MnPALS Access Task Force (MATF). Currently there is no chair. The Reference User Group would like the MATF to consolidate the back log of issues and work only on textual OPAC issues until everyone is up on version 17. There is still a need for PALS support to implement the completed, approved tasks from the MATF. The question was raised about how can we can get timelines for changes that have been approved, for oversight on their implementation.
      
      Bobby Bothmann moved that the MATF recommendations be placed on the Work Plan and implementation dates assigned to each recommendation. Tess Kasling seconded.
      Voice vote held: Majority voted yes. There were no dissenting votes.
      
      
9. Two requests for new services for the cataloging module new were presented by Bobby Bothmann. Discussion resulted in the following. For the first service, the User Group will ask MINITEX to address the issue of "junk tags" with OCLC, to see if OCLC can rectify the problem. If not, the problem would come back to User Group to see if the OCLC-fix routine in Aleph can be changed to strip non-MARC21 tags identified by the User Group. For the second service, it was suggested that an enhancement request be written.
   Both issues should be sent to the MnLINK User Group.
   
   Kathleen Daniels moved that the services requests be placed on the PALS Work Plan and also be written and submitted as an enhancement request. Adam Marsnik seconded the motion.
   Voice vote held: Majority voted yes. There were no dissenting votes.
   
   
10. Planning breakout sessions for the spring meeting was discussed. Ideas are: 1) work session on NAAUG enhancements; 2) MATF and MITF joint meeting; 3) overview of changes in version 17 for cataloging; 4) workshop on post migration cleanup issues
    
    
11. Follow up on morning session
    Moved to the end of the meeting. The meeting adjourned before this was addressed.
    
    
12. General cataloging questions
    Time was allotted for asking general questions about cataloging in Aleph.
    1. Mary Ann Greenwald showed the authority matching using p_auth_03.
    2. URL checker question. There is nothing in version 15.5 to do this. LRL has created a method to do it, those instructions were sent out on the Aleph migration list.
    3. Noted that the task manager files which are 30 days old are deleted every Tuesday night.
    4. Cataloging Web meeting comments/ideas: feedback requested about the Web meeting; noted that the last one went smoothly, was helpful, got some information out, was an opportunity to ask some questions
    5. Question about the PALS Quality Control and ability to correct PALS base record; there is no base record in Aleph. How do we correct errors on "master" record? We have to email the institution to have them correct the error.
       
       
13. Discussion of the two-day User Group format
    All agreed that having reports out early very helpful; there still was not enough time for discussion of the agenda items; two-day format is easier for smaller institutions. Location was brought up. St. Cloud or north metro is easier for northern libraries.
    
    
7. MnLINK
   Discussion about the MnLINK User Group. Bobby Bothmann asked is there a need to have a MnLINK User Group meeting? Kathleen Ashe noted that there is nothing on the MnLINK agenda that has been helpful or made a difference because we are on versions different from that of the University of Minnesota. Being on different versions makes it difficult to share workflow and other tips and ideas. The MnLINK groups discussion has only been on enhancement requests. Monica Ralston noted that discussion on enhancement requests really comes too late, and these should be happening earlier in the year. Another issue raised was how do we keep up with MARC21 changes and remaining compliant with international standards and how do we ensure that Ex Libris does this as well.
   
   

1. 10:45 Opening Remarks - Convener: Edward Swanson (MII)
   
   
2. Recorder - Virginia Heinrich (MCT)
   
   
3. Adopt Agenda
   
   
4. Approve Spring 2005 Minutes - April 26, 2005
   
   
5. 11:00 PALS Report - Mary Ann Greenwald (PALS)
   NOTES: Update on the work done in the PALS office on the PALS Work Plan
   • Work Plan: Tasks
   • Work Plan: Completed
   ACTION: Review the priorities in the Work Plan
   
   
6. 11:15 NAAUG Enhancements - Mary Ann Greenwald (PALS)
   
   
7. 11:30 Announcement of MnLINK User Groups meetings
   • Issues to take to MnLINK meetings
     ACTION: Decide on issues to take to MnLINK Cataloging meeting
     
     
8. Task Force Reports
   1. 11:40 Indexing Task Force - Bobby Bothmann (MSU)
      
      • October 17 meeting minutes
        • Tab_type_config.xls Excel Document
        • Fixed Fields for Tab_type_config.doc Word Document
        • Indexing for SYS60.xls Excel Document
   2. 12:00 Validation Work Group - Stephanie McConnell (BSU)
   3. 12:10 Authorities Task Force - Anne Levin (MHS)
   4. 12:25 MnPALS Access Task Force - Sheila Hatchell (MHS) and Tess Kasling (SBJ)
      
      

• 12:30 Pickup Boxed Lunches
  
  

9. 12:40 New Services for Cataloging Module - Bobby Bothmann (MSU)
   • Correct records with fix routine -
     NOTES: Strip junk tags from a record before it is put into the Aleph database.
     ACTION: Decide to add this to the PALS Work Plan with a priority.
   • Cleanup items not linked to holdings & holdings without items
     NOTES: Have PALS create a report for libraries on a specific timeline. This report will identify holding records without items.
     ACTION: Decide to add this to the PALS Work Plan with a priority.
     
     
10. 12:50 Planning Breakout Sessions for 2006 Spring MnPALS User Group meeting
    
    
11. 1:00 Follow-up from Mornings General Session
    1. ARC Demo - Mary Ann Greenwald (PALS)
    2. Other
       
       
12. 1:20 General Cataloging Questions - Take questions from the floor as well as comments on those below:
    1. p-auth-03
    2. URL checker
    3. Task manager files deleted
    4. Cataloging WebMeeting Comments/Ideas
       
       
13. 1:40 Discussion of Return to Two-Day User Group Format and Evaluation of Today's Meeting
    
    
14. 1:45 Other Business/Adjourn
    
    

6. NAAUG Enhancements & Voting
   • The final NAAUG Enhancements for 2005-2006 Version 19 have been posted.
   • There are a total of 15 proposed enhancements: three each for Acquisition/Serials, Cataloging/Authorities, Circulation/Reserves, OPAC, and Systems/Administration.
   • You will notice that Ex Libris has assigned development weights to each proposed enhancement. Ex Libris has agreed to do 120 development weights for Version 19, due out in January of 2007. Each of the two server sites for MnLINK is allowed 100 votes for a total of 200 votes.
   • The MnPALS User Groups will submit their recommendations to the chairs of the MnLINK subsystem user groups.
   • The MnLINK User Groups will meet on October 31 to discuss the enhancements. They will submit recommendations to the ILS Operations Committee and the Policy Advisory Council. The ILS Operations Committee and the Policy Advisory Council will meet the beginning of November to decide where to place our 200 votes.
   • The 200 votes can be distributed to many of the enhancements or only a few. Those votes must be submitted to the NAAUG chairs by November 15. The votes are then tallied and submitted to Ex Libris for Version 19.
     
     
   Action: Each individual subsystem group should review their 3 enhancements and discuss them. It is also a good idea to be aware of the enhancement requests from other subsystems as that enhancement may also be beneficial in your area. After discussion, a motion or recommendation from your subsystem group should be made and forwarded to the MnLINK meetings on October 31.
   
   
10. Future Breakout Sessions
    • This agenda item came from User Council.
    • The User Council would like to see the MnPALS User Groups as an opportunity to discuss software issues as well as other issues related to functional areas.
    • These breakout sessions could be planned for just a particular subsystem meeting or if it is something other people would be interested in it could be scheduled as a separate breakout session.
    • By discussing it now, people would have time to plan for the next user group meeting in April.
      
      
    Action: The group should discuss possible ideas for breakout sessions either for everyone or just that particular subsystem. Volunteers to do these breakout sessions would also be needed. It may be necessary to form a task group to work on this.