Page Comparison

A. No change. Nothing happens as far as linking.

B.  I expect something else. 

A. No change. Nothing happens as far as linking.

B. I expect something else. 

A. Allow a user to decide to keep links or remove them ONCE user hits the Derive a new MARC bib record action

B. Always preserve linking

C. Never preserve linking

D. I expect something else. 

A MARC bib field linked to authority records Then user overlays the MARC bib record via single record import 

Update bib record via data import with NO change to the linked bib field

1. User updates a linked bib record via data import.
2. The import file contains a bib record with a  
   1. No change to authority linked MARC 100 bib field
      1. Indicators
      2. Controlled  values
      3. Uncontrolled values
   2. Assume that the matched $0 is included in the import file

A. No impact to linking 

B. I expect something else. 

Update bib record via data import with A Change to linked bib field value(s) NOT controlled by authority

1. User updates a linked bib record via data import.
2. The import file contains a bib record with a  
   1. A linked 700 field has a change to uncontrolled $e. For example update $e from author to $e author $e narrator
   2. No change to controlled values 
   3. No change to indicators  
   4. Assume multiple 700s exist in file 
   5. Assume that the matched $0 is included in the import file

A. No impact to linking 

B. I expect something else.   

Update bib record via data import with a Change to a linked bib field value Controlled by authority

1. User updates a linked bib record via data import.
2. The import file contains a bib record with a  
   1. 1. change to Linked MARC bib 100 field $a  Angeloo, Maya BUT is linked to authority record 100 $a Angelou, Maya 
   2. Assume that the matched $0 is included in the import file

Question 1: How common is this scenario? 

A. Very common

B. Occasional

C. Very rarely happens. Definitely edge case.  

Question 2: What is your preferred outcome for this scenario?

A. Do not update the field. Flag the reason why as this record is controlled by an authority record.  FOLIO provides a report when a user attempts to edit controlled values. (Applies to repeatable fields too) 

B. Proceed with update. FOLIO provides a report that informs user that  update conflicts with linked authority record. If user edits bib record via quickMARC then system can auto-correct to accurate values when user hits Save. A message/indicator can display for use to unlink authority record or allow for quickMARC to auto-correct. (Applies to repeatable fields too) 

C. I expect something else 

Question 1

Question 2

Update bib record via data import AND linked bib field has no $0 AND changes to uncontrolled values

1. User updates a linked bib record via data import.
2. The import file contains a bib record with a  
   1. Linked MARC 100 bib field without a $0
   2. Has changes to uncontrolled value(s) 

Question 1: How common is this scenario? 

A. Very common. We do not maintain $0. 

B. Occasional

C. Very rarely happens. We maintain $0. Definitely edge case.  

Question 2: What is your preferred outcome for this scenario?

A. Continue with update to uncontrolled value(s) and to $0. Bib field remains controlled (linked to an authority record). FOLIO provides a report when a linked bib field has a missing $0 value. And when user edits bib record via quickMARC then auto-populate $0 when user hits Save. (Applies to repeatable fields too) 

B. I expect something else 

Update bib record via data import AND linked bib field has no $0 AND changes to controlled values

1. User updates a linked bib record via data import.
2. The import file contains a bib record with a  
   1. Linked MARC 700 bib field does not include $0 in the file.
   2. Has changes to controlled value(s)

Update bib record via data import AND Linked bib field has a different $0 value  

1. User updates a linked bib record via data import.
2. The import file contains a bib record with a  
   1. Linked MARC 700 bib field includes a $0 but the value stored  (ex. no234556) is not the same as what is in the import (ex. no234349). No other change made to this MARC bib 700 field
   2. Assume multiple 700s exist in file

Update bib record via data import AND Linked bib field has a different $0 and change to a controlled value in an import file to be updated. 

1. User updates a linked bib record via data import.
2. The import file contains a bib record with a  
   1. Linked MARC bib 100 field includes a $0 but the value stored  (ex. no234556) is not the same as what is in the import (ex. no234349).
   2. And subfield $d has changed from 1900 - 1998 to 1900 - 2000 

Question 1: How common is this scenario? 

A. Very common. We do not maintain $0. 

B. Occasional

C. Very rarely happens. We maintain $0. Definitely edge case.  

Question 2: What is your preferred outcome for this scenario?

A. Do not update the field. Flag the reason why as this record is controlled by an authority record.  FOLIO provides a report when a user attempts to edit controlled values. (Applies to repeatable fields too) 

B. Proceed with update. FOLIO provides a report that informs user that  update conflicts with linked authority record. If user edits bib record via quickMARC then system can auto-correct to accurate values when user hits Save. A message/indicator can display for use to unlink authority record or allow for quickMARC to auto-correct. (Applies to repeatable fields too) 

C. I expect something else 

Question 1

Question 2

Update bib record via data import and contains multiples of the same repeatable MARC field and one of them is linked AND has no $0 

1. User updates a linked bib record via data import.
2. The import file contains a bib record with
   1. Several MARC bib 700 fields that are linked and some are unlinked. One of the linked MARC bib 700 field has no $0

Question 1: How common is this scenario? 

A. Very common. We do not maintain $0. 

B. Occasional

C. Very rarely happens. We maintain $0. Definitely edge case.  

Question 2: What is your preferred outcome for this scenario?

A. Continue with update. Bib field remains controlled (linked to an authority record). FOLIO provides a report when a linked bib field has a missing $0 value. And when user edits bib record via quickMARC then auto-populate $0 when user hits Save. 

B. I expect something else 

Question 1

Question 2

A. No change. Nothing happens as far as linking.

B. I expect something else. 

Edit MARC authority (010 $a field) records via quickMARC

1. User accesses MARC authority record (personal name - 100 $a Twain, Mark, $d 1835-1910) 
2. This record is linked to 1000 bib records
3. User edits the record's 010 $a value 
4. User hits Save 
5. Display a message that informs user of the total number of linked bib records that will be updated
6. If user proceeds with update then bib records will be updated in a separate process. 
7. The Outcome options columns has several questions.  

Question 1. If we cannot guarantee real-time updates of linked bib records (due to number of records to update) what is the MOST tolerable amount of time to wait for linked bib updates to complete that do not impact your workflows.   

A. 30 minutes 

B. 60 minutes

C. 8 hours

D. 12 hours

E. 24 hours

F. I want to schedule when these updates happen

G. Do not allow a user to change 010 $a. Make it a read-only field (just like 001).

H. I expect something else

Question 2. How should FOLIO communicate the state of updating linking MARC bib records?

A. Dashboard/widget

B. In-app report 

C. Job logs list similar to data import (UX) - https://bugfest-mg.int.aws.folio.org/data-import (username: folio / password: folio) 

D. I expect something else

Question 1

Question 2

Edit MARC authority (1XX field) records via quickMARC

1. User accesses MARC authority record (personal name - 100 $a Twain, Mark, $d 1835-1910) 
2. This record is linked to 1000 bib records
3. User edits the record's 1XX value from from Twain, Mark to Twain, Marc E. 
4. User hits Save 
5. Display a message that informs user of the total number of linked bib records that will be updated
6. If user proceeds with update then bib records will be updated in a separate process. 
7. The Outcome options columns has several questions.  

Question 1. If we cannot guarantee real-time updates of linked bib records (due to number of records to update) what is the MOST tolerable amount of time to wait for linked bib updates to complete that do not impact your workflows.   

A. 30 minutes 

B. 60 minutes

C. 8 hours

D. 12 hours

E. 24 hours

F. I want to schedule when these updates happen

G. I expect something else

Question 2. How should FOLIO communicate the state of updating linking MARC bib records?

A. Dashboard/widget

B. In-app report 

C. Job logs list similar to data import (UX) - https://bugfest-mg.int.aws.folio.org/data-import (username: folio / password: folio) 

D. I expect something else

Question 1

Question 2

Edit MARC authority (NOT 010 $a or 1XX field) field via quickMARC 

1. User accesses MARC authority record (personal name - 100 $a Twain, Mark, $d 1835-1910) 
2. This record is linked to 1000 bib records
3. User edits the record's 4XX value  
4. User hits Save 

A. No impact to any bib records linked to the authority record 

B. I expect something else

Edit MARC authority (1XX field) records via data import 

1. User imports a MARC authority record (personal name - 100 $a Twain, Mark, $d 1835-1910) 
2. This record is linked to 1000 bib records
3. Import includes an update to the record's 100 $a value from Twain, Mark to Twain, Marc E. 

Question 1. If we cannot guarantee real-time updates of linked bib records (due to number of records to update) what is the MOST tolerable amount of time to wait for linked bib updates to complete that do not impact your workflows.   

A. 30 minutes 

B. 60 minutes

C. 8 hours

D. 12 hours

E. 24 hours

F. I want to schedule when these updates happen

G. I expect something else

Question 2. How should FOLIO communicate the state of updating linking MARC bib records?

A. Dashboard/widget

B. In-app report 

C. Job logs list similar to data import (UX) - https://bugfest-mg.int.aws.folio.org/data-import (username: folio / password: folio) 

D. Add an indication of the status of updating bib records on the Data import job list?

E. I expect something else

Question 1

Question 2

Edit MARC authority (010 $a field) records via data import 

1. User imports a MARC authority record (personal name - 100 $a Twain, Mark, $d 1835-1910) 
2. This record is linked to 1000 bib records
3. Import includes an update to the record's 010 $a value  

A. No impact. Create as a new MARC authority record.

B. I expect something else

Edit MARC authority (NOT 010 $a or 1XX field) records via data import 

1. User imports a MARC authority record (personal name - 100 $a Twain, Mark, $d 1835-1910) 
2. This record is linked to 1000 bib records
3. Import includes an update to record's 4XX value  

A. No impact to any bib records linked to the authority record 

B. I expect something else

Delete MARC authority record via quickMARC

1. User wants to delete MARC authority record (personal name - 100 $a Twain, Mark, $d 1835-1910) 
2. This record is linked to 1000 bib records 

A. Allow for deletion to proceed. Ask user to confirm that they want to delete the authority record. Ensure they understand impact of unlinking these records by providing # of records to be unlinked.  Linked bib fields are no longer linked. Retain [$a Twain, Mark, $d 1835-1910] only change is user can now edit these values because no longer controlled. 

B. Do not allow a user to delete authority record with linked bib records. 

C. I expect something else