API for querying for MARC records stored in SRS
(UXPROD-3086)
|
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | UX Product |
| Components: | None |
| Affects versions: | None |
| Fix versions: | R2 2021 | Parent: | API for querying for MARC records stored in SRS |
| Type: | New Feature | Priority: | P2 |
| Reporter: | Jenn Colt | Assignee: | Jenn Colt |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | r1-2021-at-risk, r1-highlight, split | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue links: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Epic Link: | API for querying for MARC records stored in SRS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Estimation Notes and Assumptions: | More advanced search functionality split from the R1 issue. Edge module functionality has been split to UXPROD-2916. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Development Team: | Spitfire | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cap Plan Fix Version (DO NOT CHANGE): | R2 2021 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Cornell (Full Sum 2021): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Duke (Full Sum 2021): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: 5Colleges (Full Jul 2021): | R2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: TAMU (MVP Jan 2021): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: U of AL (MVP Oct 2020): | R2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Score: | 8 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Showstopper for Summer 2021 Implementers?: | Yes | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Showstopper Comments from Summer 2021 Implementers: | [Jenn from Cornell: This is critical for us because without it we cannot query the 10 million bibliographic records that describe our collection and drive discovery. These queries are used for selecting records to export to services like OCLC, identifying records as part of import processes, and identifying records that need cleanup.
Potential workarounds: * Query LDP - MARC functionality is also not present there, in addition the data is only loaded every 24 hours. More than that, these functions are part of important record operations and we want the maintenance of the API providing that functionality to be part of FOLIO proper. In this same category would be a nightly dump of MARC records that we then examine with local scripting, requiring a lot of local, not shareable development. * Direct database access - this might be an alternative but it is not available to us and would likely be more difficult than using the API, and is generally contrary to how FOLIO works. * Don't do the work - Not performing the cleanup, enhancement, and export jobs facilitated by these queries would have a significantly negative impact on discovery and patron experience.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Showstopper December 11 Meeting Summary: | The data is expected to be in the LDP, but it is not there yet. What if it isn't there on time? Or isn't refreshed enough? Also, why should a library have to implement the LDP in order to do this work? Jenn is the PO for this feature, and is from Cornell, so this feature wouldn't need to be completed too far in advance of Cornell's go-live date. If the date ends up not being in the LDP on time, other implementers will need this as well. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Showstopper Capacity Planning Team Recommendation: | The Capacity Planning Team recommended to the FOLIO Product Council that the Iris release date be extended to May 3 (from March 1) so that all of the at-risk 'showstopper' features could be completed and released before the July implementations. (Slide deck presented to PC: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/12s_fs3vqjm4hAGIfZ_HX1jm--v8QOEFber5uvo0VTGw/edit?usp=sharing) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Showstopper FOLIO Product Council Decision: | FOLIO Product Council compromised and allowed the Iris release to be delayed by one month, to April 5. Due to the size of the t-shirt estimate for this feature, will NOT be completed as part of the Iris release. The Capacity Planning Team will be meeting to discuss how/when this feature will be delivered to the libraries needing it before implementation. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
This feature holds the story for more advanced MARC queries split into R2 or R3.
Current situation or problem: In scope Allow for search based on the presence or absence of a field, subfield, indicator, or fixed field position Out of scope Use case(s) |
| Comments |
| Comment by Khalilah Gambrell [ 12/May/21 ] |
|
Jenn Colt, is the labeling of this feature as At-Risk tied to the unknowns regarding MARC Authority records? |
| Comment by Jenn Colt [ 12/May/21 ] |
|
Hi Khalilah Gambrell no, I was thinking of the migration script. Maybe I'm being overly anxious about it. If the meeting we've had to postpone a couple of times has a good result tomorrow, I can remove it. |