Page Comparison

Recordings are posted Here (2022+) and Here (pre-2022) Slack channel for Q&A, discussion between meetings

Requirements details Here Additional discussion topics in Subgroup parking lot

Attendees: Ann-Marie Breaux (Deactivated) leeda.adkins@duke.edu Jennifer Eustis Christie Thomas Heather MacFarlane (Deactivated) Jenn Colt Lynne Fors Monica Arnold Lloyd Chittenden Taylor Smith Robert Scheier

Morning Glory

Morning Glory Folijet and Spitfire planning: dashboard where you can see the current scope and status of Data Import work for Morning Glory
Folijet Current Development Board
Folijet Current Bug Board

Agenda topics:

Morning Glory Bugfest
- Starts Monday
- Sign up for test cases
- Any questions?
Lotus Hotfix 3 dashboard:
- Key factors: regressions or not, risk level, data integrity, any workarounds
- 035 Matching regression
  Jira Legacy
  server System JiraJIRA
  serverId 01505d01-b853-3c2e-90f1-ee9b165564fc
  key MODSOURCE-521
  - Will be included in Lotus HF3
  - Related to
    Jira Legacy
    server System JiraJIRA
    serverId 01505d01-b853-3c2e-90f1-ee9b165564fc
    key MODSOURCE-509
  - Review 001/003/025 examples - any other scenarios we should document?
    - Add one with the ocm/ocn prefix - DONE (record 8)
    - Is there a way to use a MARC modification to remove the ocm/ocn, but keep the rest of the OCLC 035? (e.g. change 035$a (OCoLC)ocm1234567 to 035$a (OCoLC)1234567) - STILL TBD
      - In Aleph, a little fix to remove the letters
      - In Sierra, a line in the load profile to remove the OCLC and RLIN prefixes
      - In OLE, default was not to build an 035 from the 001 and 003
    - Consider option to not build an 035 when importing to create or update (e.g. the Inventory Single Record Import Updates) - STILL TBD
      - Need to be careful if opting to NOT add 035, that the 035 already exists in the record, or else the data that was previously in the 001/003 will be lost when they are replaced with the HRID
Misc bugs
- Jira Legacy
  server System JiraJIRA
  serverId 01505d01-b853-3c2e-90f1-ee9b165564fc
  key MODDATAIMP-690
  Create jobs without match profiles that include records with 999 ff fields cause errors in the srs-instance relationship
- Jira Legacy
  server System JiraJIRA
  serverId 01505d01-b853-3c2e-90f1-ee9b165564fc
  key MODDATAIMP-427
  - Conflicting expected results in the 2 bugs - which is correct: fail the job or remove old 999 ff and create new one?
  - Different expected result for MARC Bibs vs MARC Authorities vs MARC Holdings? No
  - Expected result: better not to create a new Inventory record/SRS (which then will probably be a duplicate that has to be cleaned up); discard with error message that the incoming record contained 999ff/UUID
  Duplicate records in incoming file causes problems after overlay process with no error reported
- Jira Legacy
  server System JiraJIRA
  serverId 01505d01-b853-3c2e-90f1-ee9b165564fc
  key MODDATAIMP-604
  - Based on the match, 2 or more incoming records in the file are going to update 1 existing FOLIO record
  - Only apply to MARC Bibs, or Authorities/Holdings also?
  - Use cases
    - Multiple copies or volumes on different invoice lines: May depend on what the match point is (if a VRN in 9xx data)
    - Electronic resources with different URLs but the same record number
  - Confirm expected behavior (OK to apply to all 3 MARC record types)
    - Probably OK to process the first copy of the record and then fail the second with a error message about it being a duplicate in the same file
      - Does it matter if record is 1 and 40 in the original file vs 40 and 41 in the original file?
    - Ideal have an option to define whether it does that or not (can we do this when we get to multi?) would be to process both sequentially, and not have an error at all
UI Changes in Nolana
- Will review in more detail next week
- Suppress Preview area
- Replace "Undo" behavior with confirmation modal
- Profile changes related to Importing orders

...

Versions Compared

Old Version 5

New Version Current

Key