Hi Josh, I have that diagram and a few others in a public gliffy account. Please feel free to use anything below with attribution to Grace Dunbar/Equinox. Thanks!
http://www.gliffy.com/go/publish/2218308 (Record Specificity in Evergreen) http://www.gliffy.com/go/publish/2066811 (Holds Targeting and Opportunistic Capture) http://www.gliffy.com/go/publish/2066957 (Holds Boundaries) Grace On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Josh Stompro <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Grace, I understand what the document is saying now. I was just > confused by the idea that it was possible for the proximity to be setup > based on geography, since the Org Unit Proximity Adjustments were not > available then. > > > > Thanks for the flow chart, we were shown that early on by our trainer, and > I’ve wanted to get another look at it but I haven’t remembered to ask. > > > > Is the source for that available? Would it be possible to add that image > to the official docs? > > Thanks > > > > Josh Stompro - LARL IT Director > > > > *From:* Open-ils-general [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Grace > Dunbar > *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:47 AM > > *To:* Evergreen Discussion Group > *Subject:* Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Soft Stalling - PINES hold white-paper > > > > Josh, > > Often, public library hierarchies follow loose geographic boundaries, like > counties. When Evergreen was launched, the best hold selection sort order > feature and the proximity adjustment feature were not part of the Evergreen > software. At the time, org unit groups were the best representation the > software could make of geographic groups. > > Also, attached is a diagram that I created for PINES and the community > back in 2010 to try to diagram how the distinct parts of holds work > together (targeting/opportunistic capture/re-targeting/stalling). > Hopefully, this may be of some help to you. Note that the diagram has "" > around "checked-in" because there are several actions that can trigger > opportunistic capture such as checking items status, etc. > > > > Cheers! > > Grace > > > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Hardy, Elaine <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Josh, > > > > It is actually explained earlier in the document. Proximity is one of two > key misunderstandings (see numbered page 22 (26th page of document)). The > complete sentence on numbered page 23 (27th page) is: > > > > Due to a miscommunication between staff at Equinox Software and GPLS, > proximity was defined as geographic rather than organizational. > > > > Proximity was never geographic but was misunderstood to be so. It has > always been organizational. This misapprehension was one of the issues that > led to the belief amongst PINES libraries that holds didn’t work. > > > > I often use the term current when referring to Evergreen functionality > since it can change in the future as well as differing from past > functionality. > > > > *Elaine* > > > > J. Elaine Hardy > PINES & Collaborative Projects Manager > Georgia Public Library Service > 1800 Century Place, Ste 150 > Atlanta, Ga. 30345-4304 > > > > 404.235.7128 > 404.235.7201, fax > [email protected] > www.georgialibraries.org > www.georgialibraries.org/pines > > > > *From:* Open-ils-general [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Josh > Stompro > *Sent:* Friday, September 04, 2015 2:01 PM > *To:* Evergreen Discussion Group > *Subject:* Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Soft Stalling - PINES hold white-paper > > > > Hello Elaine, I’ve been reading through this report, and I’m curious about > one section, hopefully this isn’t explained a little further down. > > > > > http://pines.georgialibraries.org/sites/default/files/files/Holds%20White%20Paper.pdf > > On page 27, this statement is made “proximity was defined as geographic > rather than organizational (see Figure 8).” > > > > Then on page 28 there is a bullet point that says > > “Current proximity is organizational not geographic.“ > > > > So was the proximity defined as geographic, then switched to > organizational, which then caused issues because people were used to the > geographic method? Is that what that is saying? Or is it saying that the > perception was that proximity was based on geographic distance vs what it > actually was (organizational distance). > > > > Thanks > > > > Josh Stompro - LARL IT Director > > > > *From:* Open-ils-general [ > mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Hardy, > Elaine > *Sent:* Thursday, September 03, 2015 11:17 PM > *To:* Evergreen Discussion Group > *Subject:* Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Soft Stalling > > > > We did some pretty extensive research on holds in 2013. While it is PINES > policy centric, it might answer other questions you may have. It is > available at http://pines.georgialibraries.org/holds-white-paper > > > > *Elaine* > > > > J. Elaine Hardy > PINES & Collaborative Projects Manager > Georgia Public Library Service > 1800 Century Place, Ste 150 > Atlanta, Ga. 30345-4304 > > > > 404.235.7128 > 404.235.7201, fax > [email protected] > www.georgialibraries.org > www.georgialibraries.org/pines > > > > *From:* Open-ils-general [ > mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Joan > Kranich > *Sent:* Thursday, September 3, 2015 2:03 PM > *To:* 'Evergreen Discussion Group' < > [email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Soft Stalling > > > > Hi Elaine, > > > > Thank you for the response. I did not realize that stalling does not take > into consideration whether or not the pickup library owns a copy or not. I > appreciate the answers to my question. > > > > Joan > > > > Joan Kranich > > C/W MARS Member Services > > [email protected] > > 508-755-3323 ext. 21 > > > > *From:* Open-ils-general [ > mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Hardy, > Elaine > *Sent:* Thursday, September 3, 2015 12:38 PM > *To:* Evergreen Discussion Group > *Subject:* Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Soft Stalling > > > > Unless things have changed in the last versions, stalling is only for > opportunistic capture. Stalling does not apply to the holds targeter. > During the stall, the targeter process can identify a copy outside the > pickup library and it can be captured by the owning library and transited > for the hold. Also, stalling does not take into consideration whether or > not the pickup library owns a copy or not. Opportunistic capture is stalled > regardless. > > > > > > *Elaine* > > > > J. Elaine Hardy > PINES & Collaborative Projects Manager > Georgia Public Library Service > 1800 Century Place, Ste 150 > Atlanta, Ga. 30345-4304 > > > > 404.235.7128 > 404.235.7201, fax > [email protected] > www.georgialibraries.org > www.georgialibraries.org/pines > > > > *From:* Open-ils-general [ > mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Joan > Kranich > *Sent:* Thursday, September 03, 2015 12:16 PM > *To:* 'Evergreen Discussion Group' > *Subject:* [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Soft Stalling > > > > Hi, > > > > I have a question about the Library Setting Soft Stalling. > > > > If we retarget Holds every 24 hours and set the soft stalling for 2 days > will the Hold that has targeted the pickup location’s copy target another > available/eligible copy in 24 hours or will the Hold continue to target the > pickup location’s copy until after the 2 days stalling period? > > > > I have found the soft stalling is more effective if set system wide than > if it set for an individual library. > > > > Thanks for any information you can share. > > > > Joan > > > > Joan Kranich > > C/W MARS Member Services > > [email protected] > > 508-755-3323 ext. 21 > > > > > > > > -- > > Grace Dunbar, Vice President > Equinox Software, Inc. - The Open Source Experts > [email protected] > 1-877-OPEN-ILS www.esilibrary.com > -- Grace Dunbar, Vice President Equinox Software, Inc. - The Open Source Experts [email protected] 1-877-OPEN-ILS www.esilibrary.com
