RE: IUG Enhancements Voting C15/S8, C20/S2, C22/S25

["Seeman, Corey Glenn" <CSeeman at UTNet dot UToledo dot Edu>]

Hi Eeva -- 

I believe you just volunteered to be a functional expert for next year!

A number of problems have been reported to the list and that is great.  As a functional expert and the co-coordinator this year, I appreciate to see the things that went well, and not so well.  But what this really does (in my mind) is show how complicated this process is for all the parties.  I know that the FEs worked very hard on these ballots, but we tended to look very narrowly at our own categories first and foremost.  Kristen Hewitt and Elizabeth Thomsen will be leading this charge next year and they are starting to look at ways to curtain redundancy in the ballot.  I guess it is a good thing because people are reading it!

We have certainly notices some duplications between the different categories this year and are working on means to make sure that it happens less frequently in the future.  In many cases, the systems requests propose more general solutions whereby the ones in the module categories are more specific to that module.  Where it gets confusing is that the system has now (and really always has had) a single edit program for changes in all record types.  In looking at the examples below, I think that these are similar, but the middle one (C20/S2) is the one that really represents the same thing.  Another complicating factor is that we sometimes propose (in these enhancements) slightly different solutions to similar problems.  

I think that for now, we would be poorly served to make any changes to the ballot with just around two weeks left in the voting.   I believe that we should vote for what we want even if there is some redundancy.  If there are similar requests that are "winners", then that will be all the more incentive for Innovative to get these into a future release.

Thanks again for sending these along to the list.  This is not the official line, but just my thoughts on the matter.

Best -- Corey



-----Original Message-----
From: innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org [mailto:innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org] On Behalf Of Eeva Stierwalt
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 1:43 PM
To: innopac at innopacusers dot org
Cc: iss053 at bangor dot ac dot uk
Subject: IUG Enhancements Voting C15/S8, C20/S2, C22/S25

Good afternoon!  There seems to be some duplication between the Cataloguing "C" enhancements and the overall System "S" enhancements as follows:

C15 (linking to suggestions 1537, 1992, 2259) to do with storing initials in records in updating, looks exactly like S8 (linking to 1456).

C20 (linking to suggestion 2214) to do with "Save record view properties", looks exactly like S2 (linking to 1389, 1602, 2157, 2519)

C22 (linking to suggestion 2201) to do with Create Lists and list numbering,  looks exactly like S25 (linking to 1692)

We don't know how to vote for these (we obviously don't want to vote for them twice and would like them across the board ― ie. not just in Cataloguing..).  Should these remain in systems and can others be opened up for votes in Cataloguing??? (Or is it too late in the game for this?).  Thanks so much and kind regards, Eeva

Eeva Stierwalt
Information Systems Specialist
Automated Collection Management
London Public Library
251 Dundas St.
London, ON  Canada  N6A 6H9
t 519.661.5100 ex 5156
f 519.663.9013
e eeva dot stierwalt at lpl dot london dot on dot ca


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---
--
This message was distributed through the Innovative Users Group INNOPAC list
Public replies:  INNOPAC at innopacusers dot org
Update your subscription options: http://innopacusers.org/mailman/listinfo/innopac