Still thinking about this.
David Lee King

Yes, not patron data in the sense of sole ownership. I think the difference is that for these items that are patron specific (if the link to the patron is maintained) permission is needed before we make use of the data. It is patron data in my mind because it involves a level of personal sensitivity.

General search term usage is clearly library data — we don’t have to ask for any permission to see how many times the search term “dogs” was used on our ILS. But if we start telling a user that since we noticed they searched for “dogs” two weeks ago we wanted to draw attention to a new book about dogs that just arrived…well, without permission that could get a bit creepy.

I think such a usage would probably best be done through an opt-in system which is what the left (Patron) side of the chart is really focusing on. That is PII, and so needs to be protected and used with all due consideration and transparency to users.

The things I stuck in the middle section, I think can be implemented via opt-out as they don’t seem personal to up the creep factor too much. Adding a “people also checked out…” to a book record is pretty anonymous and so can be opt-out.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.