2020-02-06 Metadata Management Meeting notes

Round II Libraries are libraries that are going live without the MVP go live features.

There are a two libraries that are requiring MVP features to go live. They are not considered 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-dZLGYfK2zSWXKQxSKPJMvILlUsXox0kVVBDKNFohLU/edit

From today's PC notes:

“Ability to find & edit single MARC Record & Save to SRS” - this would require pulling a PO & devs from other MVP work.  EBSCO offered a PO (Steph Buck) and a small team (4 EPAM devs) to work on this feature, which will keep all other MVP work on task/schedule

What are Round II libraries? Round II

• Round II is not MVP, it seems – these are institutions that want to go live prior to MVP

This functionality is needed in advance of when MARCcat will be functional

Looking for participants to work on this SRS editor.

Could resources be devoted to MARCCat instead of using resources for this sort of amendment? Harry - MARCCat development will continue as planned. MARCCat is viewed as a "flow-blown cataloging tool". Some libraries don't need the functionality of MARCCat because some institutions work outside of their ILS for cataloging. This small, quick, simple tool may help get many libraries up and running more quickly. This is more of a text editor than a MARC editor.  MARCCat, in addition will have a data editor, a storage place, and a search mechanism.

Laura requested having more than one MM Rep. on this group. 

Jason pointed out that MARCCat comes with maybe too many layers and complications. Should we continue to put resources into this development. Kelly Drake thinks it's a good time for the community to reevaluate the MARCCat project. 

Harry believes the group is generally in agreement. He cautions that we not use this as a reason or example to not re-purpose code. Sometimes re-purposing code is beneficial. 

Laura would like to have the conversation about MARCCat.

Volunteers: Maybe - Doreen Herold, Lehigh? Natascha Owens? Laura recommended that re-use use cases that exist. The leader of this working group will be Stephanie from EBSCO. Stephanie expressed the need to keep the group small, lightweight, and agile. Mark Arnold is from a Round II library. He volunteered too. 

How unfinished is MARCcat? Is it not able to accomplish the simple editing we are talking about building the new app for? Harry believes it can do simple editing, but it does not interface with FOLIO correctly yet. Charlotte pointed out that it is not in at Cult's purview to create the MARCCat/FOLIO connection. Charlotte believes there is a lot of progress in MARCCat's development. She pointed out that there are two tracks: one for MARCCat and another for this ad-hoc editor.

Patty wondered how the OCLC connection fits in and is this and SRS editor being planned?

• OCLC development with Index Data is being done 
• The SRS editor will show the records in MARC format (not JSON). This screen will be editable. Felix pointed out MARC will not be edited as plain text, but "it's better than nothing". What are the time savings, if any? Concerns about validation. It's possible that building a screen that sets out some structure and validation may be preferable. Laura - once there is MARC validation then it 
• Via chat - "I would rather stabilize those apis for Terry rather than start something new" - Harry answered, work is underway to do just this.
• Via chat (Lisa Furubotten) - "I'm sorry, I'm confused. If I have OCLC, this new quickie editor, and now MARCEdit later -- why do I need MARCCAT?" Answer: Some libraries do not use OCLC, need local storage, especially for authority records.
• Lloyd (via chat) - MarcEdit can do some bulk editing (find and replace). Will I be able to pull a group of records into MarcEdit easily? - Answer: "Yes"
• MarcEdit - OAI-PMH - you can get records out, but not put them back. 
• Lloyd (via chat) - "Seems like stabilizing the APIs for Terry solves most of these problems. Maybe that should be the priority." Harry agreed. 
• Representatives for this group will check back in with this SIG. Laura would like 2 MM reps in addition to reps from the Round II representatives. Please contact Stephanie: |ssbuck at ebsco.com|

In Settings > Inventory following controlled vocabulary follows the RDA standard: format, mode of issuance, resource type

Following the RDA standard the controlled vocabulary in English is to be all lower case, but the RDA standard collide with FOLIO's text case rules: https://ux.folio.org/docs/guidelines/language-rules/text-case-rules/

Thoughts/opinions? 

To Do: Give feedback to Charlotte on Slack or volunteer. Please keep in mind languages other than English when doing this work. The hope is to come to a decision on this quickly.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jr77FGuUtqZJHPxVWLXiI9FMe4xMIL-5KOxUhzSfQM0/edit#

To Do: Will do the review of requirements and Jira stories in the small group (Felix Hemme, Lisa Sjögren, Theodor, Laura Wright and others), who started the spec work. Charlotte will send out a Doodle poll on Slack, channel # non-srs-sources-for-instances.

Alternate Graphical Representations -

https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/REP-234

https://wiki.folio.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=78336464

x

VZG

Stanford

Index Data