Inventory (UXPROD-785)

[UXPROD-127] A process is needed to periodically refresh the record against the source (Knowledge base) Created: 18/Jan/18  Updated: 06/Dec/23

Status: Draft
Project: UX Product
Components: None
Affects versions: None
Fix versions: None
Parent: Inventory

Type: New Feature Priority: P3
Reporter: Cate Boerema (Inactive) Assignee: Charlotte Whitt
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 0
Labels: crossrmapps, inventory, metadatamanagement, post-v1
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original estimate: Not Specified

Attachments: PNG File Skærmbillede 2019-06-03 kl. 16.41.11.png     PNG File eHoldings integration flow.png    
Issue links:
Relates
relates to UXPROD-138 Locally-stored metadata records for e... Closed
relates to UXPROD-1080 Locally-stored metadata records for e... Closed
relates to FOLIO-1273 Define and describe the architecture ... Open
relates to FOLIO-1331 Define and describe the architecture ... Open
relates to UXPROD-151 Ebook packages - relationship to indi... Draft
relates to UXPROD-1298 Inventory App: Container Record: KB u... Blocked
Epic Link: Inventory
Analysis Estimate: Small < 3 days
Analysis Estimator: Charlotte Whitt
Front End Estimate: Large < 10 days
Front End Estimator: Niels Erik Nielsen
Front-End Confidence factor: Low
Back End Estimate: Large < 10 days
Back End Estimator: Niels Erik Nielsen
Estimation Notes and Assumptions: Dependencies between the KB and Inventory; and the seamless push and pull of data between apps (FOLIO-1273) - there are som system design discussion to have here. How is this process for refresh to be scheduled? Will KB push this or will inventory pull it?
Kiwi Planning Points (DO NOT CHANGE): 1
PO Rank: 62
PO Ranking Note: CW: PO rank aligned with Calculated Total rank.
Rank: BNCF (MVP Feb 2020): R1
Rank: Chalmers (Impl Aut 2019): R5
Rank: Chicago (MVP Sum 2020): R4
Rank: Cornell (Full Sum 2021): R4
Rank: Duke (Full Sum 2021): R4
Rank: 5Colleges (Full Jul 2021): R4
Rank: FLO (MVP Sum 2020): R4
Rank: GBV (MVP Sum 2020): R4
Rank: hbz (TBD): R1
Rank: Hungary (MVP End 2020): R1
Rank: Lehigh (MVP Summer 2020): R4
Rank: Leipzig (Full TBD): R1
Rank: Leipzig (ERM Aut 2019): R1
Rank: TAMU (MVP Jan 2021): R4
Rank: U of AL (MVP Oct 2020): R4

 Description   

Purpose: A process is needed to periodically refresh the record against the source (Knowledge base). Essentially, this is about defining how to keep update of eResources, which originate from the KB, and then have gotten a fuller description of the bibliographic record in Inventory (eResources in Inventory).

Two use cases: updates to access information in holdings for selected titles (e.g., platform change, URL change) & updates to Instances – updates to Instances depends on first having ability to create Instances based on titles in KBs



 Comments   
Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 11/Jun/18 ]

Hi Charlotte Whitt, I know this feature came directly from the MM tab on the v1 roadmap, but given what you know about the current design for Inventory, does it still make sense? In what scenario would this functionality be needed/used?

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 11/Jun/18 ]

Hi Cate Boerema - oh, this is an example on, where the original road map text, and what we have now and the current thinking is not that easy to map 1:1.

So if this story:
a) is about Codex Search - then we have implemented this. Codex Search do cross app search and do directly linking to the KB
b) is about how to keep update of eResources, which originate from the KB, and then have gotten a fuller discribtion of the bibliographic record in Inventory (eResources in Inventory) - then we have not implemented this yet. Maybe this need to be captured in the context of: FOLIO-1273 Open

My thinking was b)

Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 11/Jun/18 ]

Thanks, that makes sense. I am going to add that to the description

Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 02/May/19 ]

Would this only be for Instance records? And only for Instance records that do not have underlying MARC records? If the Instance is related to a MARC record, then the refresh would happen via whatever process is refreshing the underlying MARC record, not via any direct connection between KB and Inventory.

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 03/May/19 ]

Hi Ann-Marie Breaux - good point. This story is written way back when we reviewed the Functional matrix, and my latest comment was from June 2018, when we didn't have any idea of how to deal with underlying MARC records maintained in MARCcat

This story is about dependencies between the KB (eHoldings and other KBs) and Inventory; and the seamless population of data from other apps.

Now Q2 2019 we are much wiser about app interaction - e.g. Order < > Inventory, and we should be able to better define the process, in the context of the system design we have aligned around.

We might still need to figure out in more detail how the refresh is supposed to work, and also e.g. a way to schedule the refresh (to be an automatic process, and not someone need to remember to do).

Regarding maintain of Instance records with an underlying MARC record, being maintained in MARCcat, then I can't see that these records should have any different data flow that any other type of records - so then the refresh would be the MARC record in MARCcat, and the updates being populated via SRS to Inventory. Wouldn't you say so too? Ann-Marie Breaux

CC: Martina.Schildt Khalilah Gambrell

Comment by Khalilah Gambrell [ 22/May/19 ]

Charlotte Whitt, in order this feature should we address or review UXPROD-151 Draft ? That feature seems to be one of the items Kristin Martin has brought up at recent ERM and App interaction subgroup meetings. I guess what I am proposing is before we address this story, we ask RM SIG to provide a high level list of requirements for what they want the relationship between a KB package/title and an Inventory container/instance/item. We also have MM + RM SIGs confirm what KB data should be passed to create/update container/instance/item records.

Also one more note: due to FOLIO's current architecture there is no way to push any metadata updates to container/instance/item records. And speaking for EBSCO KB, we do not have any APIs that send metadata changes only. I cannot speak for Owen Stephens and eResources. Either way, I am unsure how we can proceed with this feature until FOLIO-1331 Open and FOLIO-1273 Open are addressed.

cc: Martina.Schildt and Owen Stephens

Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 07/Aug/19 ]

Khalilah Gambrell Charlotte Whitt Cate Boerema Martina.Schildt Owen Stephens

There was a change on this Jira, so it surfaced in my brain again today when it showed up in my inbox. Not sure when/if this will be prioritized, but please include me in discussions. If any of this involves MARC records, then we need to take SRS into account, not just Inventory. Thank you!

Generated at Fri Feb 09 00:05:58 UTC 2024 using Jira 1001.0.0-SNAPSHOT#100246-sha1:7a5c50119eb0633d306e14180817ddef5e80c75d.