1

Primo Product Working Group

IGeLU 2010

2

Agenda for Today

PWG Business Primo PWG members and roles Work of the group in 2009/10 Enhancements management Proposals for Working Group membership

Question and Answer Session

Primo Version 3 Talks

3

Primo Product Working Group

Primo PWG members and roles: Chair – Mandy Stewart

Deputy Chair – Gary Johnson    Conference Co-ordinator – Gary Johnson   

Secretary – Peter Christiensen

Australia and New Zealand representative – Tom Ruthven Enhancement management group – Christian Haenger    ,

Naomi Greidinger, Ole Holm

4

Primo Product Working Group

Work of the group in 2009/10: First round of enhancement voting using NERS Collaborative testing of Primo Version 3 Business meeting in Copenhagen Meetings with ELUNA PWG members in Fort Worth Working with Ex-Libris on moving enhancements

from Pivotal to NERS Working with NERS developers on system

5

Primo Product Working Group

Enhancement Management:

Voting once a year

Review by Enhancement Management Group

De-duplication and clarification

6

Primo Product Working Group

Proposals for Working Group membership:

Current members to continue this year

Need to maintain continuity

Elections for half the group in 2011

Communication using the Mailing List

7

Question and Answer Session

What are the plans for more customisation options for Views in Primo, particularly authentication using PDS, Label names for search, hyperlinking, Help, Error messages and statistical reports?

Background: Different Views can have different authentication requirements,

for example the View that has e-journal articles is for current staff and students but a View for a Membrane Technology Research Group can include researchers outside the university who are not recorded in the University's directory and who should not get access to e-journals.

8

Question and Answer Session

Labels for Display, Sort, Facets and Links can be customised per View but not Search labels

Hyperlinking is available for Author and Subject only and applies to all Views. It would be useful if any part of the PNX record identified for hyperlinking, with different selections possible for different Views, similar to what is available for Facets.

Help on the User Tile and Main Menu Tile go to the one Help File. An easy way to point Views at different Help files would be very useful

When Error messages route users to a Home Page it should go to the appropriate View Home Page

The Statistical reports from the Primo Back Office have parameters for Date and Institution by not View

9

Question and Answer Session

Currently, only 100 items per record will be sent from Aleph to Primo. This is a system limitation that was announced in SI 16384-195255 on Primo version 3 and Aleph integration - number of items.

What time plans does Ex-Libris have for fixing and delivering a solution to this problem?

10

Question and Answer Session

As far as I know, Primo currently supports LC enrichment. However, as many libraries use DDC, Primo needs to support DDC enrichment as well. Could you clarify the schedule for DDC enrichment?

11

Question and Answer Session

FRBR, one of the most powerful functionalities in Primo, is somewhat restricted for translated materials. Especially, there are the great number of translated publications in Asia. So, to perform properly for libraries in Asia, it seems that its performance needs to be enhanced. Could you clarify the schedule of FRBR enhancement?

12

Question and Answer Session

Primo has the excellent Primo Report Centre. However, its statistics are based on institution unit, and it doesn't support View based statistics. But, View based statistics are very important to examine the users' behaviour on the web. So, we expect that Primo can be equipped with view-based statistics functionality. Could you tell us whether you are considering supporting View based analytics?

13

Question and Answer Session

Ex Libris' business model for custumers who want to purchase Primo is among others (!) based on the size of their catalog, on the number of records that are exported and indexed by Primo (of course, there is *no* library interested in a discovery tool which would not include its catalog in such discovery tool!).

Nevertheless, a library with a big catalog is not especially a library with big financial resources... The catalog size is usually to be explained by historical reasons (old library, legacies...), and not financial ones. This business model is very attractive for libraries with smaller catalog, but not for libraries with bigger catalog (eg more than 1,000,000 records) which have limited financial resources.

Could Ex Libris take this into account and base eg their business model more on FTE's? Or developp different parallel business models?

14

Question and Answer Session

Discovery tools will likely develop more and more in the next future. Who knows what kind of discovery tool will be available in 5 or 10 years? There will probably be new tools that will make actual products obsolete: federated search was a revolution in 2000, it is not anymore! Primo is one of the best (maybe the best) discovery tool now. What about in 5 years?

Libraries which are interested in Primo have to purchase it and then to pay an annual maintenance fee. This a quite common way of working. Why not thinking about another way of doing? Instead of puchasing a discovery tool, libraries could only pay an annual subscription (like for many DB). If none purchase hasn't been done, it's easier for libraries to subscribe to another better discovery tool. So, libraries are not tied and bound to the solution they bought some years ago and can change more easily.

15

Primo Product Working Group

Thank you

Any Questions?