MARC-Instance mapping rules need to be extended to cover "staff only" for 599 field
Description
CSP Request Details
CSP Rejection Details
Potential Workaround
Attachments
defines
relates to
Checklist
hideTestRail: Results
Activity
Lisa Sjögren October 11, 2022 at 8:17 AMEdited
I understand that Ruslan's mapping should work.
Could you just confirm that the construction I asked about
does not and should not be expected to, nor are there any plans for it to, set the 599 notes to Staff only. This is a construction which works for some other fields.
Since the set-by-indicator strategy will require the library to update the indicators for their 599s, and tweak their workflows, I want to be able to say with confidence that this is currently the only way to do it.
Ann-Marie Breaux October 3, 2022 at 9:12 PM
Hi I'm sorry - I missed your comment a couple days ago
To cricle back to my question above, and to be able to provide an answer to Wellesley – could you please clarify what the expected behaviour is if I configure the mapping rules for the 599 field as follows:
If you use the mapping provided by Ruslan in a comment several above this one (which is slightly different from what you show in your comment), then the 599 mapping ought to work for Wellesley
With regards to whether this is a bugfix: not exactly. In Nolana, we are expanding the "staff only" via Ind1 = 0 that is used by several 5xx fields in the default mapping to also be used by the 590 field. That should make it easier to copy the mapping from the default 590 into the 599 or any other 59x field that you like. In the meantime, if you update Wellesley's map as Ruslan indicates, it shoud work find for the 599 field in their environment
Ann-Marie Breaux October 3, 2022 at 8:57 AM
Hi Tested this on Snapshot, and all looks good with the 590 field. I'm closing this bug.
TestRail created and linked to this bug and the original Staff-only 5xx Jira. The MARC file attached to the TestRail covers the various cases for all the 5xx fields noted in both Jiras.
Reminder to me and everyone: We added default mapping for the 590 field, NOT the 599 - but provided details on how the mapping for the 590 can be adapted for the 599 for libraries that prefer to use 599 instead of 590.
Maksym Ishchenko October 3, 2022 at 8:22 AM
Hi , Okay, thank you
Ann-Marie Breaux October 3, 2022 at 8:19 AM
Hi I'll sort out the TestRail for this one. It needs a specially created MARC record.
Reminder to : DO NOT add a TestRail, since this change would not affect the default MARC-to-Instance map, but update the TestRail for MODSOURMAN-377 to include field 590
Workaround: Use field 590 instead of 599
Steps to reproduce/assumptions
If the 599 section in the default mapping rules contains:
{
"rules": [
{
"value": "true",
"conditions": []
}
],
"target": "notes.staffOnly",
"subfield": [
"a",
"b",
"d",
"e",
"p",
"q",
"t"
],
"description": "If true, determines that the note should not be visible for others than staff",
"applyRulesOnConcatenatedData": true
}
the below is expected behaviour:
1. Go into Inventory.
2. Find an instance with an underlying MARC record.
3. Add a 599 field with 1st indicator = 0, 2nd indicator = [blank] to the MARC record via quickMARC
4. Save.
5. Review the updated instance
Expected behaviour:
The instance has a local note with Staff only=Yes.
Actual behaviour:
The instance has a local note with Staff only=No.
another trial produced this:
I just had to check.
1. Toggling first indicator between 0 and 1 in the 599 for https://wellesley.folio.ebsco.com/inventory/view/5da7d81b-8192-56a5-9a9f-7920bc8d6e2d?query=pierrot toggles the staffOnly back and forth
2. Fetching the mapping rules from
baseUrl
/mapping-rules/marc-bib shows that the value should always be true.It does not make use of the set_note_staff_only_via_indicator. The behaviour in 1 contradicts this.3. After exporting the record and importing it again, the behaviour in 1. is no longer shown
4 After updating the rules, to always set the staffOnly to false, these rules work as expected for QM edits
5. Resetting the rules (to set staffOnly to false) makes everything (import and QM edits) work as expected again.
Additional expected behavior from (from comments below)
590 with 1st indicator = 0 is Staff only, and with any other 1st indicator is NOT Staff only. I discovered we do map 590 in the default MARC-to-Instance map, but we don't do the 1st indicator/Staff only tweak that we implemented in .
Individual tenants should be able to adjust their default maps so that any other 59x field (591-599) can be added to the mapping and can follow the 1st indicator/Staff only behavior
Attached file MODSOURMAN-827.mrc can be used for testing