NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16/NN_1992_16.iso/spool/bit/listserv/notisl/2884

Text File | 1992-07-27 | 11.4 KB | 329 lines

Comments: Gated by [e-mail]
Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!auvm!A1.RELAY.UPENN.EDU!ALTSTATT
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Msg-Class: ALL-IN-1 V2.3 BL8-4 Rev. AAC 20-Dec-1988
Message-ID: <54229072702991/37488@RELAY>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 14:13:01 -0400
Sender:       NOTIS/DOBIS discussion group list <[e-mail]>
From:         "Lynne Altstatt" <[e-mail]>
Subject:      ACQUISITIONS SIG 1992 ENHANEMENT BALLOT
Comments: To: [e-mail], [e-mail],
              [e-mail]
Comments: cc: Carton Rogers <[e-mail]>
Lines: 313

------- Forwarded message

Posted: Mon, 27 Jul 92 00:00:01 -0400
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 14:13:01 -0400
Author:



      First I want to thank everyone who submitted suggestions
for this ballot to select the acquisitions enhancements for the
official Notis Enhancement Survey.  I appreciate your time and
effort, especially at this time of the year.

      I believe everyone participating in this exercise should
realize the purpose of the Enhancement Survey as defined by
NOTIS.  This purpose is illustrated in the following paragraph in
a letter from NOTIS to the SIG Chairs in the spring.

     Clearly, due to misconceptions regarding the function of the
     Survey, the current process has set user expectations too
     high.  It was designed as a means of determining the
     priorities NOTIS and KeyNOTIS users place on desired
     functionality.  NOTIS Systems is committed to reviewing the
     results of the Survey; however, NOTIS in no way promises
     development.  The result of the Survey is important, but is
     just one factor in NOTIS' prioritization for future
     development.

The letter also discussed enhancements which receive high
priority but are not slated for development due to varying
factors such as, difficulty, limited resources, and
architecture-related issues.  Unfortunately the enhancement 'to
allow relinking of order records,' which came in second in the
1991 Survey is an example of an enhancement which NOTIS excluded
from this years's ballot.  I am not sharing this information in
criticism of NOTIS, but trying to provide a reasonable
expectation for the enhancement process.

      All SIG members may vote in this survey, which will narrow
the enhancements to the desired number required for the official
NOTIS ballot.  Multiple votes from one site will be counted as a
percentage of the vote from that site.  Please select and rank
your top ten enhancements from the following list.  Your top
enhancement should be rated 1 and your tenth favorite enhancement
rated as 10.  You do not need to return the entire survey to me.
A listing which clearly indicates the number of the enhancements
you prefer and their rankings is all that is needed.  Please
include the name of your library in your response.  The deadline
for accepting ballots is August 7th.  Please send your response to Lynne
 Altstatt at one of the
following addresses.

Lynne Altstatt
Head of Acquisitions, Van Pelt Library
University of Pennsylvania
3420 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6276

INTERNET:  [e-mail]

FAX:   [phone]

TELEPHONE:  [phone]

Please note the deadline is August 7th.  I appreciate your
participation in this project.  Please do not hesitate to contact
me if you have any questions.

Lynne Altstatt
Chair, Acquisitions Special Interest Group

_________________________________________________________________

                         BALLOT RESULTS


Rank   ENHANCEMENT ITEM NUMBER

 1.    ______

 2.    ______

 3.    ______

 4.    ______

 5.    ______

 6.    ______

 7.    ______

 8.    ______

 9.    ______

10.    ______

RANK IN PRIORITY ORDER WITH 1. AS THE MOST DESIRED ENHANCEMENT.


                NOTIS ACQUISITIONS INTEREST GROUP
                       ENHANCEMENT SURVEY
                              1992

                       ENHANCEMENT BALLOT

FISCAL

 1. Index the vendor's invoice number.
EXPLANATION:  Vendor invoice numbers should be searchable on-
line.

 2. Display online the items charged against a fund.
EXPLANATION:  Librarians need to be able to see on-line the items
charged against a fund, qualified by commitments or expenditures
in a given year.

 3.  Develop purge program to remove oldest fiscal year
subrecords from the fund records.
EXPLANATION:  Fund Record is limited to 7192 bytes.  Libraries
using fiscal year subrecords for a number of years will soon be
exceeding the storage limit of the fund record.

 4.  Provide a journal file with printed documentation showing
all transactions against a fund record and expenditure class
(sorted by fund record and expenditure class) to help in tracking
down problems.
EXPLANATION:  Enable the user to identify every transaction
against a fund record.

 5.  Independent note fields in fund records.
EXPLANATION:   Note field of original fund record and fiscal year
subrecords should be independent of each other.

 6.  Update the fund commitments automatically when a new
exchange rate is entered.

 7.  Change fiscal year rollover to include rolling over
automatically the prepays (zero commitment and one P statement,
with a "b" in the xpm field).
EXPLANATION:   Saves rolling these funds over manually.

 8.  Improve the handling of currencies on printed products,
i.e., the purchase order should print the amount and the currency
designation as 330,000 Italian lira if that's what was input.

 9.  Ability for fund record to handle negative amounts, i.e., a
satisfactory way to handle deposit accounts.

10.  Ability to "link" approved invoices or to create a
supplemental invoice that would be tied to an already approved
invoice to allow for adjustments to invoices that have been
approved.
11.  Ability to process flagged funds by a "group" rule rather
than only having the choice of the default or individual rules in
the fiscal year rollover.

12.  Reports generated by the fiscal year rollover should be
available by processing unit.

13.  The fiscal year rollover should activate the new funds and
inactivate the older fund and also add the expend dates.
EXPLANATION: Less manual processing would be required.

14.  Provide fields in the invoice record which could be used
after the invoice was approved to enter local institution's check
number and date.

15.  Make READ-ONLY summary screens for each processing unit
available in the accounting module.  The screens should give
the following information:  total expenditures and commitments
by group; grand totals for each processing unit.  In each
case there should be two screens which should be similar to
the first two fund record screens.  The first screen should
give total budgets, commitments and expenditures, and the
second should give the class code breakdown.  These screens
should be updated immediately as activity occurs in the
individual funds.
EXPLANATION:  An accounting system should be able to provide the
bottom line.  Presently we must wait for paper printouts to
provide us with complete budgetary data.

16.  Ability to print an in-house voucher number on the NOTIS
voucher.


17.  Ability to delete P statements prior to approval.

18.  Increase the size of the notes fields on the invoice record.


ORDER/PAY/RECEIPT RECORD

19.  Redesign the purchase order format to include the ability:
to have more than one note to the vendor, without generating an
error message; to separate the notes to vendors from the SHIP TO
address area; and to print purchase orders on plain paper instead
of pre-printed forms.

20. Ability to regenerate purchase orders.
EXPLANATION:  Should be able to reprint purchase orders without
creating another order.

21. Ability to resequence copy holding statements.
EXPLANATION:  Provides control for the public display.
22. Chain memo statements.
EXPLANATION:  Provides capability of creating a single piece of
correspondence from more than one memo statement.  An alternative
would be to enlarge the field of the M statement.

23. Ability to resequence statements in the OPR.
EXPLANATION:   This would allow relevant statements to be
clustered together.

24.  Provide a save file for orders/claims to be sent via print
or X12.
EXPLANATION:   A save file would provide for the opportunity to
check the work of new employees and to review regularly orders
and claims about to be sent to the vendor via mail or EDI.

25.  Ability to print the entire OPR without the repetitive fixed
data at the top of the screen.
EXPLANATION:  There is considerable need to print OPRs for
collection development, acquisitions and administrative staff.
The fixed data may be repeated in screen prints many times,
making for wasted time, paper, and difficulty in reading the
prints.

26.  Ability to jump to P, M, N, and R statements directly
through a series of commands such as LAST P, First R, Last R, or
First P.
EXPLANATION:  Save time by going directly to the part of the
record that we need to access.  This is particularly important
for order records that are more than 20 screens long.

27.  Order record purge.
EXPLANATION:  Ability to tailor order record purge (LB450) to
local requirements, specifically to be able to include/exclude
groups of records from the purge.

28.  Add additional order status codes that could be used for
such situations as: paid for, but not received; items requiring
credit, but otherwise complete; and canceled, but all parts not
yet received.

29.  Expand the NV field.

30.  Automatic elimination of action dates when orders are Z'd
out.

31.  OPR should state the number of lines in the record.

32.  Display copy holdings line in OPR.

GENERAL

33. Provide electronic linkages.
EXPLANATION:  Ability to transmit and import order data, claims,
reports, invoices, etc. using ANSI X12.

34. Templating for fund, order, bibliographic, and invoice
records.
EXPLANATION:  Reduce time spent on input by providing the ability
to set defaults at the beginning of a session when working on
fund, order, bibliographic, or invoice records.

35. Ability to move from the item record to the index screen
without rekeying the search.
EXPLANATION:  Selectors sometimes need to view the use of an item
and then return to the index screen to continue their searching
as part of the selection process.

36.  Ability to move back one screen just as we have the ability
to move forward one screen.
EXPLANATION:  Current BACK command or use of the PF11 key return
the user to the first screen of the record so you have to page
back through the record to come to the desired screen.

37.  Ability to move back one screen in the various index
records.
EXPLANATION:  Similar to above.

38.  Skip the intermediary index screen when searching a unique
title, like the OPAC does.

39.  Keyword searching available in staff mode.

40.  Improve capabilities for editing the bibliographic records.

41.  Terminal operator should be able to exercise more control
over printer products, i.e., should be able to issue a cancel
purchase order command or update record and reprint command.

42.  Ability to create and update notes to vendor and memo codes
locally.

43.  Ability to export/import data in standard formats.

44.  Expand the expired action date list so that it includes more
information about the order and a decision about handling can be
made from the printout.

45.  Ability to delete vendor codes that are inactive.
EXPLANATION:  Relieve clutter on the system.

46. Index the vendor address file.
EXPLANATION:  On-line access by name of vendor is needed; key
word access is also desirable.



------- End of Forwarded message