Features that will be implemented to enhance FOLIO's ability to support consortia (Phase 1)
(UXPROD-4049)
|
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | UX Product |
| Components: | None |
| Affects versions: | None |
| Fix versions: | Poppy (R2 2023) | Parent: | Features that will be implemented to enhance FOLIO's ability to support consortia (Phase 1) |
| Type: | New Feature | Priority: | P1 |
| Reporter: | Christine Schultz-Richert | Assignee: | Christine Schultz-Richert |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | LC1, at-risk, consortia, data-import, ecs, inventory, metadatamanagement | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue links: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Release: | Poppy (R2 2023) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Epic Link: | Features that will be implemented to enhance FOLIO's ability to support consortia (Phase 1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front End Estimate: | Very Small (VS) < 1day | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front End Estimator: | Khalilah Gambrell | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front-End Confidence factor: | 80% | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back End Estimate: | XXXL: 30-45 days | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back End Estimator: | Khalilah Gambrell | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back-End Confidence factor: | 80% | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Development Team: | Spitfire | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PO Rank: | 0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Cornell (Full Sum 2021): | R5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
Current situation or problem: Consortia members must have the ability to collaborate in contributing and managing cataloging records. In scope
Out of scope
Additional information:
Notes
|
| Comments |
| Comment by Kalibek Turgumbayev [ 02/Jun/23 ] |
|
Should be implemented similarly to Shared Instance import in consortia (https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UXPROD-4141). |
| Comment by Pavlo Smahin [ 07/Jun/23 ] |
|
Hi Christine Schultz-Richert, as I understand it is expected that authority will be imported to a central tenant and then automatically shared with member tenants. But there is still an ability to use data import for creating local authorities in member tenants. How we have to deal with these local records? |
| Comment by Christine Schultz-Richert [ 07/Jun/23 ] |
|
Hi Pavlo Smahin - the ability to create new local authorities via data import in member tenants will be disallowed with the absence of appropriate permissions. However, if the permissions are for some reason turned on and a user does import an authority record into an individual member tenant, I would expect that the central tenant would not need a mechanism to index that record. I'm assuming this means that the record would not be discoverable in the UI, is that correct? |
| Comment by Pavlo Smahin [ 07/Jun/23 ] |
|
I'm not sure that there is some possibility exist to restrict via permissions using some data-import profiles, only running a job could be restricted. Please correct me if I don't know something and provide details on how this could be achieved. We could restrict such records to be not indexed and not searchable, but without changes they will be indexed. |
| Comment by Valery_Pilko [ 13/Jun/23 ] |
|
Hi Christine Schultz-Richert Scenario 1: Scenario 2: |
| Comment by Christine Schultz-Richert [ 13/Jun/23 ] |
|
Hey Valery_Pilko - Scenario 1 is correct; however, in Scenario 2, the central tenant index should also contain the local member tenant records so the user should also see "2" in "Number of titles" column. Pavlo Smahin - am I correct on above, that the central index would include both the shared bibliographic records and any that were local to the member tenants? |
| Comment by Pavlo Smahin [ 13/Jun/23 ] |
|
Hey Christine Schultz-Richert, there is still no confidence in how mod-search will handle all this. We still have discussions if there will be one shared index, many member indexes, or many member and one shared indexes. |
| Comment by Valery_Pilko [ 04/Jul/23 ] |
|
Hi Christine Schultz-Richert |
| Comment by Christine Schultz-Richert [ 04/Aug/23 ] |
|
Hey Valery_Pilko - for documentation, here are the responses:
|