[MODINVSTOR-633] Format reference values - rdacarrier types - missing value for audio belt (sb) Created: 06/Nov/20  Updated: 10/Jun/21  Resolved: 06/Jun/21

Status: Closed
Project: mod-inventory-storage
Components: None
Affects versions: None
Fix versions: 21.0.0

Type: Story Priority: P3
Reporter: Charlotte Whitt Assignee: Alen
Resolution: Done Votes: 0
Labels: support
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original estimate: Not Specified

Attachments: PNG File 5C_sandbox_formats_audio.png     PNG File Screen Shot 2020-11-18 at 1.51.21 PM.png     PNG File Screenshot 2020-11-18 at 19.46.04.png     PNG File Skärmavbild 2020-11-18 kl. 19.44.00.png     PNG File Skärmavbild 2020-11-18 kl. 21.19.03.png     PNG File Skärmavbild 2020-11-24 kl. 15.39.07.png     PNG File Skärmavbild 2021-06-06 kl. 19.27.22.png     PNG File honeysuckle_bugfest_formats_audio.png     PNG File screenshot-1.png     PNG File screenshot-2.png    
Sprint: Prokopovych - Sprint 114, Prokopovych - Sprint 115, Prokopovych - Sprint 111, Prokopovych - Sprint 113
Story Points: 3
Development Team: Prokopovych
Affected Institution:
5 Colleges
Tester Assignee: Charlotte Whitt

 Description   

Back-end Perspective

Given an new system
When mod-inventory-storage is enabled for a tenant and reference records should be loaded
Then audio – audio belt is included in the collection of instance formats

Given an existing system using an older version of mod-inventory-storage
When mod-inventory-storage is upgraded for a tenant, irrespective of whether reference records should be loaded or not
Then audio – audio belt is included in the collection of instance formats

Scope

UI Perspective

Overview: Corrections of current list of format reference values:
Adding value for audio – audio belt (sb) as documented in: https://www.loc.gov/standards/valuelist/rdacarrier.html

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Login to FOLIO Snapshot, as User diku_admin
  2. Go to the Settings app, select Inventory > Instances > Format

Expected result:
There will be a reference value:
Name: audio - - audio belt with the Code: sb

See UX mock up:

Actual result:
This reference value is missing in the current list of formats https://folio-snapshot.dev.folio.org/settings/inventory/formats

Interested parties: Jennifer Eustis Aaron NeslinAnn Kardos



 Comments   
Comment by Anya [ 06/Nov/20 ]

Charlotte Whitt

Comment by Ann Kardos [ 09/Nov/20 ]

5C FOLIO Sandbox has incorrect coding for Settings – Inventory – Formats. In the "audio" section, audio – audio cartridge is incorrectly coded as sd. Correct code is sg. I'm attaching screenshots from 5C sandbox and from FOLIO Honeysuckle bugfest.

Also, both 5C sandbox and Honeysuckle bugfest environment Formats are not up-to-date. There is a recent audio carrier for audio – audio belt, with code sb. I was able to add it to the 5C sandbox (you can see in the attachment) , but only as a local format.

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 09/Nov/20 ]

Hi Ann Kardos - this looks more as a bug, and not a feature.

Let me check what's wrong here.

CC: Anya Laura Daniels

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 18/Nov/20 ]

Hi Ann Kardos - just a quick question: when I'm looking in Bugfest Honeysuckle env. (and in FOLIO Snapshot) then I see
audio – audio cartridge (sg) as it is supposed to be according to https://www.loc.gov/standards/valuelist/rdacarrier.html

But in 5C's enviroment it's audio – audio cartridge (sb)?

Comment by Ann Kardos [ 18/Nov/20 ]

Hi Charlotte WhittCharlotte! Yes, you can see in this screenshot: audio--audio cartridge is the second element and it is coded sd.

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 18/Nov/20 ]

Hi Ann Kardos - that must be a typo in your local environment at 5C, while it's not in FOLIO Snapshot, nor in Bugfest-Honeysuckle.
Maybe you have not loaded the reference values coming with the current release?

I guess the good thing is, when you get upgraded to the Honeysuckle release, then you'll get the updated reference data.

I checked Simmons environment in Goldenrod, and here the code is also sg as in FOLIO Snapshot and Bugfest Honeysuckle:

Comment by Anya [ 23/Nov/20 ]

Mark Veksler Are we pulling this Reference data from GIt? why would this not be the same as bugfest

Comment by Zak Burke [ 23/Nov/20 ]

I don't think this is a UIIN story; maybe it should be moved to mod-inventory-storage? Regardless, a few notes:

  • audio-cartridge has been coded as sg since its initial import in June 2018. I don't know where the sd value is coming from; Marc Johnson do you know if there is another source for these values in reference values like folio-snapshot?
  • indeed, audio-belt does not have an entry in the repository presently. Judging by this entry's ID (1070) in the RDA Registry GitHub repo, this was added relatively recently. Unfortunately, the file history there is difficult to inspect and it isn't clear to me when this value was added. That said, perhaps we need to track the RDA Vocabulary version in our own instance-formats files?
Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 23/Nov/20 ]

Felix Hemme - will you help me and verify in the RDA Tool kit, what's the current implementation plan for the new RDA carrier reference value: audio – audio belt (sb)
Thanks much

Comment by Marc Johnson [ 24/Nov/20 ]

Zak Burke

I don't think this is a UIIN story; maybe it should be moved to mod-inventory-storage?

Agreed, this is a mod-inventory-storage change.

do you know if there is another source for these values in reference values like folio-snapshot?

I'm not aware of one. I concur with your evaluation of the situation.

Judging by this entry's ID (1070) in the RDA Registry GitHub repo, this was added relatively recently. Unfortunately, the file history there is difficult to inspect and it isn't clear to me when this value was added.

I exported the CSV definitions for both revisions of that file and compared them in an external tool. The only difference is the line endings they use.

Those revisions only go back to April 2020. FOLIO defined it's list in June 2018 (from Zak Burke comment above). We don't know what changes have been made in the intervening time.

Charlotte Whitt Do you know if this is a new entry since FOLIO initially defined it's set?

That said, perhaps we need to track the RDA Vocabulary version in our own instance-formats files?

Do the RDA version their definitions? If they do, we could include that information as a property in the reference records. If not, we might find it challenging to infer those versions. In the latter case, we could record when the definition was last updated (not when it was last loaded into any given system).

If this is a new value (to FOLIO at least), I don't think this is a bug.

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 24/Nov/20 ]

Marc Johnson - this ticket is about adding a new value (that's the work which is left on this original ticket, while original was wrongly assumed that an entered code for one of the values, was a FOLIO bug, but it's identified as a 5C specific bug).

The Support SIG did talk about the ticket at yesterday's meeting and I'll update the description to follow the template for a story description.

I'll mark this ticket as Draft, while as you can see in the comments above, I have asked Felix Hemme to verify in the official RDA Tool kit the date for when to expect to have this value implemented according to the RDA specifications.

Comment by Marc Johnson [ 24/Nov/20 ]

Charlotte Whitt

this ticket is about adding a new value

Thank you for confirming that and changing this to a story.

Comment by Felix Hemme [ 24/Nov/20 ]

Charlotte Whitt According to http://www.rdaregistry.info/termList/RDACarrierType/#1070 audio belt has a status of "published". It's listed in the currrent (non Beta) RDA Toolkit as well as in the beta toolkit.


Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 24/Nov/20 ]

Thanks Felix Hemme
Do the RDA standard use some type of versioning of their vocabulary, so we could keep track on changes in FOLIO?

Laura Daniels, maybe we could discuss with the MM-SIG, if we could establish a standing working group, which in a structured way tracked all planned RDA changes, which we should account for in Inventory?

Comment by Marc Johnson [ 31/Mar/21 ]

Charlotte Whitt

Are folks expecting this new value to be included in existing systems when tenants are upgraded to a newer version of mod-inventory-storage?

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 15/Apr/21 ]

Hi Marc Johnson usually we have updates of reference values as an update also for older versions of mod-inventory-storage, correct?

What about we stick to this procedure, until versioning of reference values, have been implemented. Does that makes sense?

Comment by Marc Johnson [ 15/Apr/21 ]

Charlotte Whitt

usually we have updates of reference values as an update also for older versions of mod-inventory-storage, correct?

Most of the time that turns out to be the case, IIRC

What about we stick to this procedure, until versioning of reference values, have been implemented. Does that makes sense?

I'm not sure what procedure you are referring to. If you want to make it a standard activity for this kind of work, I'm more than happy to do that. Please include it in the scope of future story definitions.

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 06/Jun/21 ]

Manual test in FOLIO Snapshot, version instance-formats 2.0, using Chrome.

All looks good. Thanks Alen. I'll close the ticket as done.

Generated at Fri Feb 09 00:26:58 UTC 2024 using Jira 1001.0.0-SNAPSHOT#100246-sha1:7a5c50119eb0633d306e14180817ddef5e80c75d.