Re: [Evergreen-general] Novelist and record harvesting - API vs. holdings uploads

[Jessica Woolford via Evergreen-general]

As I was writing my contact, it occurred to me that I think the changes
that were made were for the real time status update feature of OTS. I think
we still send an extract as well.

On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 1:34 PM Jessica Woolford 
wrote:

> Hi Dan,
>
> Last year, we needed to disable OTS for all libraries using it temporarily
> because it was causing major issues with availability. However, at the
> beginning of the year, we were able to do some testing with EBSCO and they
> rolled out some changes to our implementation that seemed to resolve the
> issue. I had assumed this meant they would be able to make those changes
> for other Evergreen sites. I can check in with the individual we worked
> with there and see if those changes are widely available, and if the
> documentation can be updated if so.
>
> Thanks,
> Jessica
>
> On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 10:06 AM Kathy Lussier via Evergreen-general <
> evergreen-general@list.evergreen-ils.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I don't have answers to Dan's questions, but to add on to what Lindsay
>> was saying, from the perspective of making Evergreen appealing to new
>> libraries considering a system switch, I think it would be a worthwhile
>> investment for the community to do whatever work is needed to remove notes
>> like these from vendor web sites. There are so many benefits to using
>> Evergreen, but this note could stop a library from even investigating
>> Evergreen as an ILS.
>>
>> Cheers!
>> Kathy
>> --
>> Kathy Lussier
>> https://kmlussier.com
>> 26 days away from having an official reason to weigh in on Evergreen
>> issues
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 8:51 AM Lindsay Stratton via Evergreen-general <
>> evergreen-general@list.evergreen-ils.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I think we should be looking very seriously at Evergreen's APIs and
>>> improving the documentation, functionality, performance, etc. More vendors
>>> and services are moving to APIs, not just for holdings, but user and
>>> transaction data as well. Speaking personally, I run holdings uploads for
>>> Novelist and Syndetics (which also now offers API uploads but not for
>>> Evergreen) and would love to shift them over to an API method. We also use
>>> a discovery layer where user data conections needs some improvement. And we
>>> have libraries interested in analytics platforms that would also benefit
>>> hugely from API connections.
>>>
>>> Lindsay
>>>
>>> *Lindsay Stratton*
>>> *Systems Librarian*
>>> Westchester Library System
>>> 570 Taxter Rd., 4th Floor
>>> Elmsford, NY 10523
>>> lstrat...@wlsmail.org
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 6:15 PM Dan Moore via Evergreen-general <
>>> evergreen-general@list.evergreen-ils.org> wrote:
>>>
 Heyo all,



 Our collections group is looking to tweak our Novelist implementation
 to make use of On The Shelf functionality, info here:
 https://connect.ebsco.com/s/article/Setting-up-On-The-Shelf?language=en_US



 There’s a curious (if not perhaps a little rude) note at the bottom of
 the page that states: “There is an Evergreen API that supports automatic
 harvesting of your collection. However, we were unable to obtain a complete
 harvest for any customers during the testing of this functionality, as
 Evergreen’s Web Services API was not built for such a wide-scale
 application. We discourage Evergreen customers from utilizing this feature
 for collection harvesting.”



 Additionally, on their KB page for the feature (
 https://eis1.my.site.com/ebsco/s/article/ILS-Export-for-NoveList-Products-and-Features?language=en_US),
 we can see some handy older screenshots of what I presume to be the old
 non-browser client. Combining that with the statement above about “during
 the testing of this functionality,” I’m presuming this was tested with
 EBSCO/Novelist at some point but that there hasn’t been an update to it
 since the browser client rolled out.



 There’s a slew of questions about this in my mind… the first being if
 what’s written here is accurate about the Evergreen API method of
 harvesting collection information not being robust enough (which generates
 an immediate follow up – what would make it robust enough?). But I’m also
 curious about the collective wisdom of the community about these
 strategies. We’re moving toward a Lean-based purchasing model wherein
 selectors will have a daily cap of titles to order so as not to create a
 wave for shipping/receiving folks to drudge through later. Real-time
 availability of holdings information would be a huge boon in supporting
 both Lean purchasing strategies AND maximizing Novelists’ effectiveness for
 reader’s advisory. However, if uploading holdings records is just the best
 way of doing it due to the performance of the API as-is or the time/money
 needed to extend it, then we’ll go that route instead – whatever delivers
 the best, most 

Re: [Evergreen-general] Novelist and record harvesting - API vs. holdings uploads

[Jessica Woolford via Evergreen-general]

Hi Dan,

Last year, we needed to disable OTS for all libraries using it temporarily
because it was causing major issues with availability. However, at the
beginning of the year, we were able to do some testing with EBSCO and they
rolled out some changes to our implementation that seemed to resolve the
issue. I had assumed this meant they would be able to make those changes
for other Evergreen sites. I can check in with the individual we worked
with there and see if those changes are widely available, and if the
documentation can be updated if so.

Thanks,
Jessica

On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 10:06 AM Kathy Lussier via Evergreen-general <
evergreen-general@list.evergreen-ils.org> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I don't have answers to Dan's questions, but to add on to what Lindsay was
> saying, from the perspective of making Evergreen appealing to new libraries
> considering a system switch, I think it would be a worthwhile investment
> for the community to do whatever work is needed to remove notes like these
> from vendor web sites. There are so many benefits to using Evergreen, but
> this note could stop a library from even investigating Evergreen as an ILS.
>
> Cheers!
> Kathy
> --
> Kathy Lussier
> https://kmlussier.com
> 26 days away from having an official reason to weigh in on Evergreen issues
>
> On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 8:51 AM Lindsay Stratton via Evergreen-general <
> evergreen-general@list.evergreen-ils.org> wrote:
>
>> I think we should be looking very seriously at Evergreen's APIs and
>> improving the documentation, functionality, performance, etc. More vendors
>> and services are moving to APIs, not just for holdings, but user and
>> transaction data as well. Speaking personally, I run holdings uploads for
>> Novelist and Syndetics (which also now offers API uploads but not for
>> Evergreen) and would love to shift them over to an API method. We also use
>> a discovery layer where user data conections needs some improvement. And we
>> have libraries interested in analytics platforms that would also benefit
>> hugely from API connections.
>>
>> Lindsay
>>
>> *Lindsay Stratton*
>> *Systems Librarian*
>> Westchester Library System
>> 570 Taxter Rd., 4th Floor
>> Elmsford, NY 10523
>> lstrat...@wlsmail.org
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 6:15 PM Dan Moore via Evergreen-general <
>> evergreen-general@list.evergreen-ils.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Heyo all,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Our collections group is looking to tweak our Novelist implementation to
>>> make use of On The Shelf functionality, info here:
>>> https://connect.ebsco.com/s/article/Setting-up-On-The-Shelf?language=en_US
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There’s a curious (if not perhaps a little rude) note at the bottom of
>>> the page that states: “There is an Evergreen API that supports automatic
>>> harvesting of your collection. However, we were unable to obtain a complete
>>> harvest for any customers during the testing of this functionality, as
>>> Evergreen’s Web Services API was not built for such a wide-scale
>>> application. We discourage Evergreen customers from utilizing this feature
>>> for collection harvesting.”
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Additionally, on their KB page for the feature (
>>> https://eis1.my.site.com/ebsco/s/article/ILS-Export-for-NoveList-Products-and-Features?language=en_US),
>>> we can see some handy older screenshots of what I presume to be the old
>>> non-browser client. Combining that with the statement above about “during
>>> the testing of this functionality,” I’m presuming this was tested with
>>> EBSCO/Novelist at some point but that there hasn’t been an update to it
>>> since the browser client rolled out.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There’s a slew of questions about this in my mind… the first being if
>>> what’s written here is accurate about the Evergreen API method of
>>> harvesting collection information not being robust enough (which generates
>>> an immediate follow up – what would make it robust enough?). But I’m also
>>> curious about the collective wisdom of the community about these
>>> strategies. We’re moving toward a Lean-based purchasing model wherein
>>> selectors will have a daily cap of titles to order so as not to create a
>>> wave for shipping/receiving folks to drudge through later. Real-time
>>> availability of holdings information would be a huge boon in supporting
>>> both Lean purchasing strategies AND maximizing Novelists’ effectiveness for
>>> reader’s advisory. However, if uploading holdings records is just the best
>>> way of doing it due to the performance of the API as-is or the time/money
>>> needed to extend it, then we’ll go that route instead – whatever delivers
>>> the best, most accurate information to patrons.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> All the best,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dan Moore
>>>
>>> Integrated Library System Administrator
>>>
>>> King County Library System
>>>
>>> Service Center, Issaquah
>>>
>>> (425) 369-3413
>>>
>>> dtmo...@kcls.org
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> King 

Re: [Evergreen-general] Novelist and record harvesting - API vs. holdings uploads

[Kathy Lussier via Evergreen-general]

Hi!

I don't have answers to Dan's questions, but to add on to what Lindsay was
saying, from the perspective of making Evergreen appealing to new libraries
considering a system switch, I think it would be a worthwhile investment
for the community to do whatever work is needed to remove notes like these
from vendor web sites. There are so many benefits to using Evergreen, but
this note could stop a library from even investigating Evergreen as an ILS.

Cheers!
Kathy
--
Kathy Lussier
https://kmlussier.com
26 days away from having an official reason to weigh in on Evergreen issues

On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 8:51 AM Lindsay Stratton via Evergreen-general <
evergreen-general@list.evergreen-ils.org> wrote:

> I think we should be looking very seriously at Evergreen's APIs and
> improving the documentation, functionality, performance, etc. More vendors
> and services are moving to APIs, not just for holdings, but user and
> transaction data as well. Speaking personally, I run holdings uploads for
> Novelist and Syndetics (which also now offers API uploads but not for
> Evergreen) and would love to shift them over to an API method. We also use
> a discovery layer where user data conections needs some improvement. And we
> have libraries interested in analytics platforms that would also benefit
> hugely from API connections.
>
> Lindsay
>
> *Lindsay Stratton*
> *Systems Librarian*
> Westchester Library System
> 570 Taxter Rd., 4th Floor
> Elmsford, NY 10523
> lstrat...@wlsmail.org
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 6:15 PM Dan Moore via Evergreen-general <
> evergreen-general@list.evergreen-ils.org> wrote:
>
>> Heyo all,
>>
>>
>>
>> Our collections group is looking to tweak our Novelist implementation to
>> make use of On The Shelf functionality, info here:
>> https://connect.ebsco.com/s/article/Setting-up-On-The-Shelf?language=en_US
>>
>>
>>
>> There’s a curious (if not perhaps a little rude) note at the bottom of
>> the page that states: “There is an Evergreen API that supports automatic
>> harvesting of your collection. However, we were unable to obtain a complete
>> harvest for any customers during the testing of this functionality, as
>> Evergreen’s Web Services API was not built for such a wide-scale
>> application. We discourage Evergreen customers from utilizing this feature
>> for collection harvesting.”
>>
>>
>>
>> Additionally, on their KB page for the feature (
>> https://eis1.my.site.com/ebsco/s/article/ILS-Export-for-NoveList-Products-and-Features?language=en_US),
>> we can see some handy older screenshots of what I presume to be the old
>> non-browser client. Combining that with the statement above about “during
>> the testing of this functionality,” I’m presuming this was tested with
>> EBSCO/Novelist at some point but that there hasn’t been an update to it
>> since the browser client rolled out.
>>
>>
>>
>> There’s a slew of questions about this in my mind… the first being if
>> what’s written here is accurate about the Evergreen API method of
>> harvesting collection information not being robust enough (which generates
>> an immediate follow up – what would make it robust enough?). But I’m also
>> curious about the collective wisdom of the community about these
>> strategies. We’re moving toward a Lean-based purchasing model wherein
>> selectors will have a daily cap of titles to order so as not to create a
>> wave for shipping/receiving folks to drudge through later. Real-time
>> availability of holdings information would be a huge boon in supporting
>> both Lean purchasing strategies AND maximizing Novelists’ effectiveness for
>> reader’s advisory. However, if uploading holdings records is just the best
>> way of doing it due to the performance of the API as-is or the time/money
>> needed to extend it, then we’ll go that route instead – whatever delivers
>> the best, most accurate information to patrons.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>>
>>
>> Dan Moore
>>
>> Integrated Library System Administrator
>>
>> King County Library System
>>
>> Service Center, Issaquah
>>
>> (425) 369-3413
>>
>> dtmo...@kcls.org
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> King County Library System is subject to the Washington State Public
>> Records Act (RCW 42.56). Senders and receivers of KCLS email should presume
>> that this email and any attachments are subject to public release upon
>> request and to state record retention requirements, unless otherwise
>> exempted.
>> --
>>
>> ___
>> Evergreen-general mailing list
>> Evergreen-general@list.evergreen-ils.org
>> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-general
>>
> ___
> Evergreen-general mailing list
> Evergreen-general@list.evergreen-ils.org
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-general
>
___
Evergreen-general 

Re: [Evergreen-general] Novelist and record harvesting - API vs. holdings uploads

[Lindsay Stratton via Evergreen-general]

I think we should be looking very seriously at Evergreen's APIs and
improving the documentation, functionality, performance, etc. More vendors
and services are moving to APIs, not just for holdings, but user and
transaction data as well. Speaking personally, I run holdings uploads for
Novelist and Syndetics (which also now offers API uploads but not for
Evergreen) and would love to shift them over to an API method. We also use
a discovery layer where user data conections needs some improvement. And we
have libraries interested in analytics platforms that would also benefit
hugely from API connections.

Lindsay

*Lindsay Stratton*
*Systems Librarian*
Westchester Library System
570 Taxter Rd., 4th Floor
Elmsford, NY 10523
lstrat...@wlsmail.org


On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 6:15 PM Dan Moore via Evergreen-general <
evergreen-general@list.evergreen-ils.org> wrote:

> Heyo all,
>
>
>
> Our collections group is looking to tweak our Novelist implementation to
> make use of On The Shelf functionality, info here:
> https://connect.ebsco.com/s/article/Setting-up-On-The-Shelf?language=en_US
>
>
>
> There’s a curious (if not perhaps a little rude) note at the bottom of the
> page that states: “There is an Evergreen API that supports automatic
> harvesting of your collection. However, we were unable to obtain a complete
> harvest for any customers during the testing of this functionality, as
> Evergreen’s Web Services API was not built for such a wide-scale
> application. We discourage Evergreen customers from utilizing this feature
> for collection harvesting.”
>
>
>
> Additionally, on their KB page for the feature (
> https://eis1.my.site.com/ebsco/s/article/ILS-Export-for-NoveList-Products-and-Features?language=en_US),
> we can see some handy older screenshots of what I presume to be the old
> non-browser client. Combining that with the statement above about “during
> the testing of this functionality,” I’m presuming this was tested with
> EBSCO/Novelist at some point but that there hasn’t been an update to it
> since the browser client rolled out.
>
>
>
> There’s a slew of questions about this in my mind… the first being if
> what’s written here is accurate about the Evergreen API method of
> harvesting collection information not being robust enough (which generates
> an immediate follow up – what would make it robust enough?). But I’m also
> curious about the collective wisdom of the community about these
> strategies. We’re moving toward a Lean-based purchasing model wherein
> selectors will have a daily cap of titles to order so as not to create a
> wave for shipping/receiving folks to drudge through later. Real-time
> availability of holdings information would be a huge boon in supporting
> both Lean purchasing strategies AND maximizing Novelists’ effectiveness for
> reader’s advisory. However, if uploading holdings records is just the best
> way of doing it due to the performance of the API as-is or the time/money
> needed to extend it, then we’ll go that route instead – whatever delivers
> the best, most accurate information to patrons.
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> All the best,
>
>
>
> Dan Moore
>
> Integrated Library System Administrator
>
> King County Library System
>
> Service Center, Issaquah
>
> (425) 369-3413
>
> dtmo...@kcls.org
>
> 
>
>
>
> --
> King County Library System is subject to the Washington State Public
> Records Act (RCW 42.56). Senders and receivers of KCLS email should presume
> that this email and any attachments are subject to public release upon
> request and to state record retention requirements, unless otherwise
> exempted.
> --
>
> ___
> Evergreen-general mailing list
> Evergreen-general@list.evergreen-ils.org
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-general
>
___
Evergreen-general mailing list
Evergreen-general@list.evergreen-ils.org
http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-general