Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and potential copies

2017-11-29 Thread Kathy Lussier 

Hi Diane,

No, proximity in Evergreen is different than geographic proximity. It is 
the proximity each org unit has to each other in the Evergreen 
hierarchy. As an example, a branch that's in the same system as your 
library will have closer proximity than a branch in another library 
system. As a result, the branches in your system will fill holds before 
they look for one in another system.


There are ways in Evergreen to adjust proximity for holds if you need 
the holds to fill a little differently. There is a longer explanation of 
how proximity works and how it can be adjusted for holds at 
http://docs.evergreen-ils.org/3.0/_org_unit_proximity_adjustments.html


Kathy


On 11/29/2017 10:20 AM, Diane Disbro wrote:


What is this “proximity” that people are talking about? I have been 
told that Evergreen doesn’t recognize geography. Are proximity and 
geography the same thing?


*Diane Disbro*

Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager

Union Branch

Scenic Regional Library

308 Hawthorne Drive

Union, MO 63084

636-583-3224

ddis...@scenicregional.org <mailto:ddis...@scenicregional.org>

www.scenicregional.org

*From:*Open-ils-general 
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] *On Behalf 
Of *Josh Stompro

*Sent:* Tuesday, November 28, 2017 10:58 AM
*To:* Evergreen Discussion Group
*Subject:* Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold 
queue and potential copies


Hello Scott, we do resource share.  One of our systems is 3x larger 
than the other, so the smaller system uses age hold protection on 
their new items to keep them home for a while.  Otherwise we were 
seeing 4x more holds placed by the larger system which was pulling a 
disproportionate share of new material from the smaller system.  The 
smaller system also recently decided to use FIFO vs proximity for 
their holds, while the larger system is sticking with check-in 
proximity priority.


Most of the highly sought after items that have lots of holds are new 
items in our experience, so the smaller system that is using FIFO will 
only fill their own customers holds in FIFO order until the age hold 
protection expires.  Once it expires then there is a chance that the 
larger system’s holds will get priority if they are older than the 
remaining smaller systems holds.  We don’t know if that is going to be 
a problem in actual usage yet.


Josh Stompro - LARL IT Director

*From:*Open-ils-general 
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] *On Behalf 
Of *scott.tho...@sparkpa.org <mailto:scott.tho...@sparkpa.org>

*Sent:* Tuesday, November 28, 2017 7:31 AM
*To:* Evergreen Discussion Group
*Subject:* Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold 
queue and potential copies


Another interesting issue was raised in this discussion. Our 
consortium is all proximity because we were told that, if org units 
within a consortium plan to resource share, they must all be FIFO or 
proximity, but it appears some of you are hybrids. Can I assume you do 
not resource share at all or do not do so beyond the local library system?


Thank you,
Scott

Scott Thomas

Executive Director

*PaILS / SPARK*

(717) 873-9461

scott.tho...@sparkpa.org <mailto:scott.tho...@sparkpa.org>

Description: Description: Training | SPARK – Pennsylvania's Statewide 
Library System <http://www.palibrary.org/pails/>


*From:*Open-ils-general 
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] *On Behalf 
Of *Diane Disbro

*Sent:* Monday, November 27, 2017 8:30 PM
*To:* Evergreen Discussion Group 
<open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org 
<mailto:open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org>>; ME list serv 
<evergr...@lists.mobiusconsortium.org 
<mailto:evergr...@lists.mobiusconsortium.org>>
*Subject:* Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold 
queue and potential copies


I am very interested to hear if someone has done something with this 
other than try to explain to disgruntled patrons why they see in their 
online account that they are next in the queue for an item but they 
wait weeks or months to get it.


Thank you, Josh, for asking.


Diane Disbro

Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager

Union Branch

Scenic Regional Library

308 Hawthorne Drive

Union, MO 63084

(636) 583-3224

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Josh Stompro 
<stomp...@exchange.larl.org <mailto:stomp...@exchange.larl.org>> wrote:


Hello, Those of you that use age hold protection and non FIFO best
hold selection sort order, what have you done with the status
column of holds in your catalog.  We just noticed that it is
showing the FIFO queue position for holds, along with all
potential copies.  This gives users bad info since for us holds
are sometimes filled in FIFO order for some orgs, and are filled
based on proximity for other locations.  And since one org uses
age hold protection, the total copy count isn’t accurate eit

Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and potential copies

2017-11-29 Thread Jason Stephenson 
On 11/29/2017 10:20 AM, Diane Disbro wrote:
> What is this “proximity” that people are talking about? I have been told
> that Evergreen doesn’t recognize geography. Are proximity and geography
> the same thing?

Proximity is calculated based on the organizational unit tree. You can
determine proximity of two locations by starting at one, then counting
up the tree by parents to the common ancestor, and then counting down to
the second location.

There is also a table where you can adjust relative proximity. You can
make two locations seem to be closer to each other than they actually are.

> 
>  
> 
> *Diane Disbro*
> 
> Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager
> 
> Union Branch
> 
> Scenic Regional Library
> 
> 308 Hawthorne Drive
> 
> Union, MO 63084
> 
> 636-583-3224
> 
> ddis...@scenicregional.org <mailto:ddis...@scenicregional.org>
> 
> www.scenicregional.org
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> *From:*Open-ils-general
> [mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] *On Behalf
> Of *Josh Stompro
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 28, 2017 10:58 AM
> *To:* Evergreen Discussion Group
> *Subject:* Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold
> queue and potential copies
> 
>  
> 
> Hello Scott, we do resource share.  One of our systems is 3x larger than
> the other, so the smaller system uses age hold protection on their new
> items to keep them home for a while.  Otherwise we were seeing 4x more
> holds placed by the larger system which was pulling a disproportionate
> share of new material from the smaller system.  The smaller system also
> recently decided to use FIFO vs proximity for their holds, while the
> larger system is sticking with check-in proximity priority.  
> 
>  
> 
> Most of the highly sought after items that have lots of holds are new
> items in our experience, so the smaller system that is using FIFO will
> only fill their own customers holds in FIFO order until the age hold
> protection expires.  Once it expires then there is a chance that the
> larger system’s holds will get priority if they are older than the
> remaining smaller systems holds.  We don’t know if that is going to be a
> problem in actual usage yet.
> 
>  
> 
> Josh Stompro - LARL IT Director
> 
>  
> 
> *From:*Open-ils-general
> [mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] *On Behalf
> Of *scott.tho...@sparkpa.org <mailto:scott.tho...@sparkpa.org>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 28, 2017 7:31 AM
> *To:* Evergreen Discussion Group
> *Subject:* Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold
> queue and potential copies
> 
>  
> 
> Another interesting issue was raised in this discussion. Our consortium
> is all proximity because we were told that, if org units within a
> consortium plan to resource share, they must all be FIFO or proximity,
> but it appears some of you are hybrids. Can I assume you do not resource
> share at all or do not do so beyond the local library system?
> 
> Thank you,
> Scott
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Scott Thomas
> 
> Executive Director
> 
> *PaILS / SPARK*
> 
> (717) 873-9461
> 
> scott.tho...@sparkpa.org <mailto:scott.tho...@sparkpa.org>
> 
> Description: Description: Training | SPARK – Pennsylvania's Statewide
> Library System <http://www.palibrary.org/pails/>
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> *From:*Open-ils-general
> [mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] *On Behalf
> Of *Diane Disbro
> *Sent:* Monday, November 27, 2017 8:30 PM
> *To:* Evergreen Discussion Group
> <open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org
> <mailto:open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org>>; ME list serv
> <evergr...@lists.mobiusconsortium.org
> <mailto:evergr...@lists.mobiusconsortium.org>>
> *Subject:* Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold
> queue and potential copies
> 
>  
> 
> I am very interested to hear if someone has done something with this
> other than try to explain to disgruntled patrons why they see in their
> online account that they are next in the queue for an item but they wait
> weeks or months to get it. 
> 
>  
> 
> Thank you, Josh, for asking.
> 
> 
> Diane Disbro
> 
> Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager
> 
> Union Branch
> 
> Scenic Regional Library
> 
> 308 Hawthorne Drive
> 
> Union, MO     63084
> 
> (636) 583-3224
> 
>  
> 
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Josh Stompro
> <stomp...@exchange.larl.org <mailto:stomp...@exchange.larl.org>> wrote:
> 
> Hello, Those of you that use age hold protection and non FIFO best
> hold selecti

Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and potential copies

2017-11-29 Thread Diane Disbro 
What is this “proximity” that people are talking about? I have been told that 
Evergreen doesn’t recognize geography. Are proximity and geography the same 
thing?

 

Diane Disbro

Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager

Union Branch

Scenic Regional Library

308 Hawthorne Drive

Union, MO 63084

636-583-3224

 <mailto:ddis...@scenicregional.org> ddis...@scenicregional.org

www.scenicregional.org

 

 

From: Open-ils-general 
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Josh 
Stompro
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 10:58 AM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and 
potential copies

 

Hello Scott, we do resource share.  One of our systems is 3x larger than the 
other, so the smaller system uses age hold protection on their new items to 
keep them home for a while.  Otherwise we were seeing 4x more holds placed by 
the larger system which was pulling a disproportionate share of new material 
from the smaller system.  The smaller system also recently decided to use FIFO 
vs proximity for their holds, while the larger system is sticking with check-in 
proximity priority.  

 

Most of the highly sought after items that have lots of holds are new items in 
our experience, so the smaller system that is using FIFO will only fill their 
own customers holds in FIFO order until the age hold protection expires.  Once 
it expires then there is a chance that the larger system’s holds will get 
priority if they are older than the remaining smaller systems holds.  We don’t 
know if that is going to be a problem in actual usage yet.

 

Josh Stompro - LARL IT Director

 

From: Open-ils-general 
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of 
scott.tho...@sparkpa.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 7:31 AM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and 
potential copies

 

Another interesting issue was raised in this discussion. Our consortium is all 
proximity because we were told that, if org units within a consortium plan to 
resource share, they must all be FIFO or proximity, but it appears some of you 
are hybrids. Can I assume you do not resource share at all or do not do so 
beyond the local library system?

Thank you,
Scott

 

 

Scott Thomas

Executive Director

PaILS / SPARK

(717) 873-9461

 <mailto:scott.tho...@sparkpa.org> scott.tho...@sparkpa.org

 <http://www.palibrary.org/pails/> Description: Description: Training | SPARK – 
Pennsylvania's Statewide Library System

 

 

 

From: Open-ils-general 
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Diane 
Disbro
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2017 8:30 PM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group <open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org>; ME 
list serv <evergr...@lists.mobiusconsortium.org>
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and 
potential copies

 

I am very interested to hear if someone has done something with this other than 
try to explain to disgruntled patrons why they see in their online account that 
they are next in the queue for an item but they wait weeks or months to get it. 

 

Thank you, Josh, for asking.




Diane Disbro

Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager

Union Branch

Scenic Regional Library

308 Hawthorne Drive

Union, MO 63084

(636) 583-3224

 

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Josh Stompro <stomp...@exchange.larl.org> 
wrote:

Hello, Those of you that use age hold protection and non FIFO best hold 
selection sort order, what have you done with the status column of holds in 
your catalog.  We just noticed that it is showing the FIFO queue position for 
holds, along with all potential copies.  This gives users bad info since for us 
holds are sometimes filled in FIFO order for some orgs, and are filled based on 
proximity for other locations.  And since one org uses age hold protection, the 
total copy count isn’t accurate either since half the copies might be age hold 
protected so they cannot fill the users holds.

 

Did you just remove that section from templates/opac/parts/hold_status.tt2?  
Did you modify it in some way?  I would like to see examples of what you 
changed it to if you changed it.

 

Should the potential copies count exclude copies that are age hold protected 
and cannot be captured for that hold?  Right now it pulls from hold copy map, 
but it looks like restricting the copy count based on the age hold protection 
might be possible to add.

 

Thanks

Josh

 

 

 

Lake Agassiz Regional Library - Moorhead MN larl.org

Josh Stompro | Office 218.233.3757 EXT-139 <tel:(218)%20233-3757> 

LARL IT Director | Cell 218.790.2110 <tel:(218)%20790-2110>

Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and potential copies

2017-11-28 Thread Josh Stompro 
Hello Scott, we do resource share.  One of our systems is 3x larger than the 
other, so the smaller system uses age hold protection on their new items to 
keep them home for a while.  Otherwise we were seeing 4x more holds placed by 
the larger system which was pulling a disproportionate share of new material 
from the smaller system.  The smaller system also recently decided to use FIFO 
vs proximity for their holds, while the larger system is sticking with check-in 
proximity priority.

Most of the highly sought after items that have lots of holds are new items in 
our experience, so the smaller system that is using FIFO will only fill their 
own customers holds in FIFO order until the age hold protection expires.  Once 
it expires then there is a chance that the larger system’s holds will get 
priority if they are older than the remaining smaller systems holds.  We don’t 
know if that is going to be a problem in actual usage yet.

Josh Stompro - LARL IT Director

From: Open-ils-general 
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of 
scott.tho...@sparkpa.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 7:31 AM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and 
potential copies

Another interesting issue was raised in this discussion. Our consortium is all 
proximity because we were told that, if org units within a consortium plan to 
resource share, they must all be FIFO or proximity, but it appears some of you 
are hybrids. Can I assume you do not resource share at all or do not do so 
beyond the local library system?
Thank you,
Scott


Scott Thomas
Executive Director
PaILS / SPARK
(717) 873-9461
scott.tho...@sparkpa.org<mailto:scott.tho...@sparkpa.org>
[Description: Description: Training | SPARK – Pennsylvania's Statewide Library 
System]<http://www.palibrary.org/pails/>



From: Open-ils-general 
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Diane 
Disbro
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2017 8:30 PM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group 
<open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org<mailto:open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org>>;
 ME list serv 
<evergr...@lists.mobiusconsortium.org<mailto:evergr...@lists.mobiusconsortium.org>>
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and 
potential copies

I am very interested to hear if someone has done something with this other than 
try to explain to disgruntled patrons why they see in their online account that 
they are next in the queue for an item but they wait weeks or months to get it.

Thank you, Josh, for asking.

Diane Disbro
Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager
Union Branch
Scenic Regional Library
308 Hawthorne Drive
Union, MO 63084
(636) 583-3224

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Josh Stompro 
<stomp...@exchange.larl.org<mailto:stomp...@exchange.larl.org>> wrote:
Hello, Those of you that use age hold protection and non FIFO best hold 
selection sort order, what have you done with the status column of holds in 
your catalog.  We just noticed that it is showing the FIFO queue position for 
holds, along with all potential copies.  This gives users bad info since for us 
holds are sometimes filled in FIFO order for some orgs, and are filled based on 
proximity for other locations.  And since one org uses age hold protection, the 
total copy count isn’t accurate either since half the copies might be age hold 
protected so they cannot fill the users holds.

Did you just remove that section from templates/opac/parts/hold_status.tt2?  
Did you modify it in some way?  I would like to see examples of what you 
changed it to if you changed it.

Should the potential copies count exclude copies that are age hold protected 
and cannot be captured for that hold?  Right now it pulls from hold copy map, 
but it looks like restricting the copy count based on the age hold protection 
might be possible to add.

Thanks
Josh



Lake Agassiz Regional Library - Moorhead MN larl.org<http://larl.org>
Josh Stompro | Office 218.233.3757 EXT-139<tel:(218)%20233-3757>
LARL IT Director | Cell 218.790.2110<tel:(218)%20790-2110>

Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and potential copies

2017-11-28 Thread scott.tho...@sparkpa.org 
Mike,
   Thank you for that clear explanation. It does indeed make sense.

Scott

From: Open-ils-general 
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Mike 
Rylander
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 10:52 AM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group <open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org>
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and 
potential copies

Scott,

It's not that you can't have a hybrid, but that FIFO sites will end up getting 
their holds prioritized over proximity-based sites if there is resource sharing 
between them, all else being equal, as FIFO only cares about request time and 
proximity cares about "closeness".  Having just one or the other in use means 
nobody gets the short end of the stick.

HTH,


--
Mike Rylander
 | President
 | Equinox Open Library Initiative
 | phone:  1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
 | email:  mi...@equinoxinitiative.org<mailto:mi...@equinoxinitiative.org>
 | web:  http://equinoxinitiative.org

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 8:30 AM, 
scott.tho...@sparkpa.org<mailto:scott.tho...@sparkpa.org> 
<scott.tho...@sparkpa.org<mailto:scott.tho...@sparkpa.org>> wrote:
Another interesting issue was raised in this discussion. Our consortium is all 
proximity because we were told that, if org units within a consortium plan to 
resource share, they must all be FIFO or proximity, but it appears some of you 
are hybrids. Can I assume you do not resource share at all or do not do so 
beyond the local library system?
Thank you,
Scott


Scott Thomas
Executive Director
PaILS / SPARK
(717) 873-9461<tel:(717)%20873-9461>
scott.tho...@sparkpa.org<mailto:scott.tho...@sparkpa.org>
[Description: Description: Training | SPARK – Pennsylvania's Statewide Library 
System]<http://www.palibrary.org/pails/>



From: Open-ils-general 
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org<mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org>]
 On Behalf Of Diane Disbro
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2017 8:30 PM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group 
<open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org<mailto:open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org>>;
 ME list serv 
<evergr...@lists.mobiusconsortium.org<mailto:evergr...@lists.mobiusconsortium.org>>
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and 
potential copies

I am very interested to hear if someone has done something with this other than 
try to explain to disgruntled patrons why they see in their online account that 
they are next in the queue for an item but they wait weeks or months to get it.

Thank you, Josh, for asking.

Diane Disbro
Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager
Union Branch
Scenic Regional Library
308 Hawthorne 
Drive<https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive%0D+%0D+%0D+Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084=gmail=g>
Union, MO 
<https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive%0D+%0D+%0D+Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084=gmail=g>
 
63084<https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive%0D+%0D+%0D+Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084=gmail=g>
(636) 583-3224<tel:(636)%20583-3224>

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Josh Stompro 
<stomp...@exchange.larl.org<mailto:stomp...@exchange.larl.org>> wrote:
Hello, Those of you that use age hold protection and non FIFO best hold 
selection sort order, what have you done with the status column of holds in 
your catalog.  We just noticed that it is showing the FIFO queue position for 
holds, along with all potential copies.  This gives users bad info since for us 
holds are sometimes filled in FIFO order for some orgs, and are filled based on 
proximity for other locations.  And since one org uses age hold protection, the 
total copy count isn’t accurate either since half the copies might be age hold 
protected so they cannot fill the users holds.

Did you just remove that section from templates/opac/parts/hold_status.tt2?  
Did you modify it in some way?  I would like to see examples of what you 
changed it to if you changed it.

Should the potential copies count exclude copies that are age hold protected 
and cannot be captured for that hold?  Right now it pulls from hold copy map, 
but it looks like restricting the copy count based on the age hold protection 
might be possible to add.

Thanks
Josh



Lake Agassiz Regional Library - Moorhead MN larl.org<http://larl.org>
Josh Stompro | Office 218.233.3757 EXT-139<tel:(218)%20233-3757>
LARL IT Director | Cell 218.790.2110<tel:(218)%20790-2110>

Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and potential copies

2017-11-28 Thread Diane Disbro 
My library has nine branches but we told the ILS that we are all in the same 
building. That way, age protected items will be FIFO to all of the patrons in 
our nine branches. Anything without age protection is FIFO throughout our 
resource sharing consortium.

 

Diane Disbro

Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager

Union Branch

Scenic Regional Library

308 Hawthorne Drive

Union, MO 63084

636-583-3224

 <mailto:ddis...@scenicregional.org> ddis...@scenicregional.org

www.scenicregional.org

 

 

From: Open-ils-general 
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of 
scott.tho...@sparkpa.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 7:31 AM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and 
potential copies

 

Another interesting issue was raised in this discussion. Our consortium is all 
proximity because we were told that, if org units within a consortium plan to 
resource share, they must all be FIFO or proximity, but it appears some of you 
are hybrids. Can I assume you do not resource share at all or do not do so 
beyond the local library system?

Thank you,
Scott

 

 

Scott Thomas

Executive Director

PaILS / SPARK

(717) 873-9461

 <mailto:scott.tho...@sparkpa.org> scott.tho...@sparkpa.org

 <http://www.palibrary.org/pails/> Description: Description: Training | SPARK – 
Pennsylvania's Statewide Library System

 

 

 

From: Open-ils-general 
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Diane 
Disbro
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2017 8:30 PM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group <open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org>; ME 
list serv <evergr...@lists.mobiusconsortium.org>
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and 
potential copies

 

I am very interested to hear if someone has done something with this other than 
try to explain to disgruntled patrons why they see in their online account that 
they are next in the queue for an item but they wait weeks or months to get it. 

 

Thank you, Josh, for asking.




Diane Disbro

Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager

Union Branch

Scenic Regional Library

308 Hawthorne Drive

Union, MO 63084

(636) 583-3224

 

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Josh Stompro <stomp...@exchange.larl.org> 
wrote:

Hello, Those of you that use age hold protection and non FIFO best hold 
selection sort order, what have you done with the status column of holds in 
your catalog.  We just noticed that it is showing the FIFO queue position for 
holds, along with all potential copies.  This gives users bad info since for us 
holds are sometimes filled in FIFO order for some orgs, and are filled based on 
proximity for other locations.  And since one org uses age hold protection, the 
total copy count isn’t accurate either since half the copies might be age hold 
protected so they cannot fill the users holds.

 

Did you just remove that section from templates/opac/parts/hold_status.tt2?  
Did you modify it in some way?  I would like to see examples of what you 
changed it to if you changed it.

 

Should the potential copies count exclude copies that are age hold protected 
and cannot be captured for that hold?  Right now it pulls from hold copy map, 
but it looks like restricting the copy count based on the age hold protection 
might be possible to add.

 

Thanks

Josh

 

 

 

Lake Agassiz Regional Library - Moorhead MN larl.org

Josh Stompro | Office 218.233.3757 EXT-139 <tel:(218)%20233-3757> 

LARL IT Director | Cell 218.790.2110 <tel:(218)%20790-2110>

Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and potential copies

2017-11-28 Thread Mike Rylander 
Scott,

It's not that you can't have a hybrid, but that FIFO sites will end up
getting their holds prioritized over proximity-based sites if there is
resource sharing between them, all else being equal, as FIFO only cares
about request time and proximity cares about "closeness".  Having just one
or the other in use means nobody gets the short end of the stick.

HTH,


--
Mike Rylander
 | President
 | Equinox Open Library Initiative
 | phone:  1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
 | email:  mi...@equinoxinitiative.org
 | web:  http://equinoxinitiative.org

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 8:30 AM, scott.tho...@sparkpa.org <
scott.tho...@sparkpa.org> wrote:

> Another interesting issue was raised in this discussion. Our consortium is
> all proximity because we were told that, if org units within a consortium
> plan to resource share, they must all be FIFO or proximity, but it appears
> some of you are hybrids. Can I assume you do not resource share at all or
> do not do so beyond the local library system?
>
> Thank you,
> Scott
>
>
>
>
>
> Scott Thomas
>
> Executive Director
>
> *PaILS / SPARK*
>
> (717) 873-9461
>
> scott.tho...@sparkpa.org
>
> [image: Description: Description: Training | SPARK – Pennsylvania's
> Statewide Library System] <http://www.palibrary.org/pails/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Open-ils-general [mailto:open-ils-general-
> boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] *On Behalf Of *Diane Disbro
> *Sent:* Monday, November 27, 2017 8:30 PM
> *To:* Evergreen Discussion Group <open-ils-general@list.
> georgialibraries.org>; ME list serv <evergr...@lists.mobiusconsortium.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold
> queue and potential copies
>
>
>
> I am very interested to hear if someone has done something with this other
> than try to explain to disgruntled patrons why they see in their online
> account that they are next in the queue for an item but they wait weeks or
> months to get it.
>
>
>
> Thank you, Josh, for asking.
>
>
> Diane Disbro
>
> Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager
>
> Union Branch
>
> Scenic Regional Library
>
> 308 Hawthorne Drive
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive%0D+%0D+%0D+Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084=gmail=g>
>
> Union, MO
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive%0D+%0D+%0D+Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084=gmail=g>
>   63084
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive%0D+%0D+%0D+Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084=gmail=g>
>
> (636) 583-3224
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Josh Stompro <stomp...@exchange.larl.org>
> wrote:
>
> Hello, Those of you that use age hold protection and non FIFO best hold
> selection sort order, what have you done with the status column of holds in
> your catalog.  We just noticed that it is showing the FIFO queue position
> for holds, along with all potential copies.  This gives users bad info
> since for us holds are sometimes filled in FIFO order for some orgs, and
> are filled based on proximity for other locations.  And since one org uses
> age hold protection, the total copy count isn’t accurate either since half
> the copies might be age hold protected so they cannot fill the users holds.
>
>
>
> Did you just remove that section from templates/opac/parts/hold_status.tt2?
> Did you modify it in some way?  I would like to see examples of what you
> changed it to if you changed it.
>
>
>
> Should the potential copies count exclude copies that are age hold
> protected and cannot be captured for that hold?  Right now it pulls from
> hold copy map, but it looks like restricting the copy count based on the
> age hold protection might be possible to add.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Josh
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Lake Agassiz Regional Library - Moorhead MN larl.org
>
> Josh Stompro | Office 218.233.3757 EXT-139 <(218)%20233-3757>
>
> LARL IT Director | Cell 218.790.2110 <(218)%20790-2110>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and potential copies

2017-11-28 Thread Terran McCanna 
At PINES we just comment out the hold order in the OPAC and self-check
templates so that the patron doesn't see it.

Terran McCanna
PINES Program Manager
Georgia Public Library Service
1800 Century Place, Suite 150
Atlanta, GA 30345
404-235-7138
tmcca...@georgialibraries.org


On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 8:30 AM, scott.tho...@sparkpa.org <
scott.tho...@sparkpa.org> wrote:

> Another interesting issue was raised in this discussion. Our consortium is
> all proximity because we were told that, if org units within a consortium
> plan to resource share, they must all be FIFO or proximity, but it appears
> some of you are hybrids. Can I assume you do not resource share at all or
> do not do so beyond the local library system?
>
> Thank you,
> Scott
>
>
>
>
>
> Scott Thomas
>
> Executive Director
>
> *PaILS / SPARK*
>
> (717) 873-9461
>
> scott.tho...@sparkpa.org
>
> [image: Description: Description: Training | SPARK – Pennsylvania's
> Statewide Library System] <http://www.palibrary.org/pails/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Open-ils-general [mailto:open-ils-general-
> boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] *On Behalf Of *Diane Disbro
> *Sent:* Monday, November 27, 2017 8:30 PM
> *To:* Evergreen Discussion Group <open-ils-general@list.
> georgialibraries.org>; ME list serv <evergr...@lists.mobiusconsortium.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold
> queue and potential copies
>
>
>
> I am very interested to hear if someone has done something with this other
> than try to explain to disgruntled patrons why they see in their online
> account that they are next in the queue for an item but they wait weeks or
> months to get it.
>
>
>
> Thank you, Josh, for asking.
>
>
> Diane Disbro
>
> Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager
>
> Union Branch
>
> Scenic Regional Library
>
> 308 Hawthorne Drive
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive%0D+%0D+%0D+Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084=gmail=g>
>
> Union, MO
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive%0D+%0D+%0D+Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084=gmail=g>
>   63084
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive%0D+%0D+%0D+Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084=gmail=g>
>
> (636) 583-3224
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Josh Stompro <stomp...@exchange.larl.org>
> wrote:
>
> Hello, Those of you that use age hold protection and non FIFO best hold
> selection sort order, what have you done with the status column of holds in
> your catalog.  We just noticed that it is showing the FIFO queue position
> for holds, along with all potential copies.  This gives users bad info
> since for us holds are sometimes filled in FIFO order for some orgs, and
> are filled based on proximity for other locations.  And since one org uses
> age hold protection, the total copy count isn’t accurate either since half
> the copies might be age hold protected so they cannot fill the users holds.
>
>
>
> Did you just remove that section from templates/opac/parts/hold_status.tt2?
> Did you modify it in some way?  I would like to see examples of what you
> changed it to if you changed it.
>
>
>
> Should the potential copies count exclude copies that are age hold
> protected and cannot be captured for that hold?  Right now it pulls from
> hold copy map, but it looks like restricting the copy count based on the
> age hold protection might be possible to add.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Josh
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Lake Agassiz Regional Library - Moorhead MN larl.org
>
> Josh Stompro | Office 218.233.3757 EXT-139 <(218)%20233-3757>
>
> LARL IT Director | Cell 218.790.2110 <(218)%20790-2110>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and potential copies

2017-11-28 Thread scott.tho...@sparkpa.org 
Another interesting issue was raised in this discussion. Our consortium is all 
proximity because we were told that, if org units within a consortium plan to 
resource share, they must all be FIFO or proximity, but it appears some of you 
are hybrids. Can I assume you do not resource share at all or do not do so 
beyond the local library system?

Thank you,
Scott


Scott Thomas
Executive Director
PaILS / SPARK
(717) 873-9461
scott.tho...@sparkpa.org<mailto:scott.tho...@sparkpa.org>
[Description: Description: Training | SPARK – Pennsylvania's Statewide Library 
System]<http://www.palibrary.org/pails/>



From: Open-ils-general 
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Diane 
Disbro
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2017 8:30 PM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group <open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org>; ME 
list serv <evergr...@lists.mobiusconsortium.org>
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and 
potential copies

I am very interested to hear if someone has done something with this other than 
try to explain to disgruntled patrons why they see in their online account that 
they are next in the queue for an item but they wait weeks or months to get it.

Thank you, Josh, for asking.

Diane Disbro
Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager
Union Branch
Scenic Regional Library
308 Hawthorne Drive
Union, MO 63084
(636) 583-3224

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Josh Stompro 
<stomp...@exchange.larl.org<mailto:stomp...@exchange.larl.org>> wrote:
Hello, Those of you that use age hold protection and non FIFO best hold 
selection sort order, what have you done with the status column of holds in 
your catalog.  We just noticed that it is showing the FIFO queue position for 
holds, along with all potential copies.  This gives users bad info since for us 
holds are sometimes filled in FIFO order for some orgs, and are filled based on 
proximity for other locations.  And since one org uses age hold protection, the 
total copy count isn’t accurate either since half the copies might be age hold 
protected so they cannot fill the users holds.

Did you just remove that section from templates/opac/parts/hold_status.tt2?  
Did you modify it in some way?  I would like to see examples of what you 
changed it to if you changed it.

Should the potential copies count exclude copies that are age hold protected 
and cannot be captured for that hold?  Right now it pulls from hold copy map, 
but it looks like restricting the copy count based on the age hold protection 
might be possible to add.

Thanks
Josh



Lake Agassiz Regional Library - Moorhead MN larl.org<http://larl.org>
Josh Stompro | Office 218.233.3757 EXT-139<tel:(218)%20233-3757>
LARL IT Director | Cell 218.790.2110<tel:(218)%20790-2110>

Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and potential copies

2017-11-27 Thread Diane Disbro 
I am very interested to hear if someone has done something with this other
than try to explain to disgruntled patrons why they see in their online
account that they are next in the queue for an item but they wait weeks or
months to get it.

Thank you, Josh, for asking.

Diane Disbro
Circulation Coordinator/Branch Manager
Union Branch
Scenic Regional Library
308 Hawthorne Drive
Union, MO 63084
(636) 583-3224

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Josh Stompro 
wrote:

> Hello, Those of you that use age hold protection and non FIFO best hold
> selection sort order, what have you done with the status column of holds in
> your catalog.  We just noticed that it is showing the FIFO queue position
> for holds, along with all potential copies.  This gives users bad info
> since for us holds are sometimes filled in FIFO order for some orgs, and
> are filled based on proximity for other locations.  And since one org uses
> age hold protection, the total copy count isn’t accurate either since half
> the copies might be age hold protected so they cannot fill the users holds.
>
>
>
> Did you just remove that section from templates/opac/parts/hold_status.tt2?
> Did you modify it in some way?  I would like to see examples of what you
> changed it to if you changed it.
>
>
>
> Should the potential copies count exclude copies that are age hold
> protected and cannot be captured for that hold?  Right now it pulls from
> hold copy map, but it looks like restricting the copy count based on the
> age hold protection might be possible to add.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Josh
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Lake Agassiz Regional Library - Moorhead MN larl.org
>
> Josh Stompro | Office 218.233.3757 EXT-139 <(218)%20233-3757>
>
> LARL IT Director | Cell 218.790.2110 <(218)%20790-2110>
>
>
>

[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Catalog holds status display - Hold queue and potential copies

2017-11-27 Thread Josh Stompro 
Hello, Those of you that use age hold protection and non FIFO best hold 
selection sort order, what have you done with the status column of holds in 
your catalog.  We just noticed that it is showing the FIFO queue position for 
holds, along with all potential copies.  This gives users bad info since for us 
holds are sometimes filled in FIFO order for some orgs, and are filled based on 
proximity for other locations.  And since one org uses age hold protection, the 
total copy count isn't accurate either since half the copies might be age hold 
protected so they cannot fill the users holds.

Did you just remove that section from templates/opac/parts/hold_status.tt2?  
Did you modify it in some way?  I would like to see examples of what you 
changed it to if you changed it.

Should the potential copies count exclude copies that are age hold protected 
and cannot be captured for that hold?  Right now it pulls from hold copy map, 
but it looks like restricting the copy count based on the age hold protection 
might be possible to add.

Thanks
Josh



Lake Agassiz Regional Library - Moorhead MN larl.org
Josh Stompro | Office 218.233.3757 EXT-139
LARL IT Director | Cell 218.790.2110