Page Comparison

• Receiving workflow update - Mockup review

• Inventory integration update - https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/16M_PVJ2rS4dglfASv1KADt9gn4kuucb1ZbqVSJhBH7k/edit#slide=id.p
• When something is received what status do we give it?
• Full ACQ workflow presentation update

Dennis Bridges - Formally noted Stacks acquired by EBSCO Information Services end Jan '19.

Q1 Status Report: FOLIO Q1 2019 (Bellis) Weekly Status Report

Dennis gave brief review of analysis process wrt Orders → Inventory integration , Inventory instance creation arising from acquisitions processes.

Dennis asks: What should happen to inventory resources when orders are deleted - Specifically WRT Items, Instances and Holdings.

Question: if searching will start in Orders or Inventory, Seems to be consensus (To note taker ears) that most searching will start in inventory, not orders. The "Do we already have this" use case was raised.

Question: Why is a holdings record automatically created - It was suggested you could have a URL at the instance level. Need Instance+Holding+Item for physical. Holdings record for location and call number, Item for Circ functions.

Discussion: On how if/how codex will find items which have been deleted. Dennis summarizes - Items will not be deleted, but  will be marked with a status indicating deleted. Noted that suppression of deleted records from patrons but not staff is important. Kirstin Kemner-Heek Suggested that giving users the power to choose hard-delete vs soft-status delete (Or the ability to subsequently expunge soft-deleted records) would be powerful. Dennis Bridges also described a "Purge" feature to expunge any records that should be hard-removed. Sara Colglazier talked of the need to be notified of dependencies in the delete use case - for example "This instance has X holdings and Y items attached to it". Sara Colglazier Also suggested that delete should not be automatic - but a human mediated process / librarian control.

Kristin Martin asked: Where is the connection between an Order and an Item. Ann-Marie Breaux (Deactivated) described a possible approach that an order line in the orders app should allow a user to see any inventory records relating to that order line, and that will probably be an instance level link and the user will navigate down from there. THe reciprocal view, from inventory should allow the user to see from any level in inventory the order lines relating to the instance/holding/item. KM - sought clarity on the specificity of order information, illuminated by experiences from OLE and "Secret hidden attachments".

Charlotte Whitt: Talks about the story to do with moving items between holdings records in response to KM query. Ann-Marie Breaux (Deactivated) described updating the story which describes which bib record an order is being attached to.

Kristin Martin: Repeats question that it's still not clear what the relationship is between orders and inventory.

Dennis Bridges: Seeking clarity on is the question about UX or about the data model that sits behind Orders and Inventory. The moving items around in orders story was discussed some more - Sara Colglazier supported the issue that it's hard for acquisitions staff to always correctly identify the inventory item that an will order relate to. Kristin Martin expanded on that use case and then also added the record tidy up scenario / stock weeding scenario which will also result in modifications to the instance/holdings structure. "look and the instance and see three holdings, and three orders, you should see that the three orders relate to the three holdings". Example EBSCOHost / Proquest alternate orders. Ann-Marie Breaux (Deactivated) suggested there would be 2 different holdings under the single instance in this case. Sara Colglazier asked why multiple holdings - AM suggested this would be to support multiple URLs.

Kristin Martin: Makes a solid point about multiple holdings resulting in double work - and the different routes to populating discovery. The relationship with ERM was discussed. Virginia Martin also noted that there is some confusion about the relationship with ERM / Holdings - and noted that they currently do not create holdings for electronic items.

Relationship off full descriptive records to electronic items - avoiding duplication. There is a matrix of bib data to P/E and the ability to make linkages.

Virginia Martin talks about the effort involved in patron support and investigating access queries for electronic resources (I think it was specifically about e resources)

Owen Stephens: Describes work of the app interaction group wrt these interactions.

Kristin Martin: Points out that there is a role for Link Resolvers in solving the double work problem

Dennis Bridges: The goal is NOT to force users to create inventory items in order to use orders - but there is some fuzz around what that really means in practice. We described the scenario where an order is made for an electronic item - and there is no inventory record for that e.

Ann-Marie Breaux (Deactivated): Asks: Order 1 copy of a physical thing, ordered, created brief records. Item out of print, vendor cancelled order. Bib records suppressed, item has a status of cancelled. Re-order from out of print vendor. In that case, second order reflected on instance, unsupress instance. Question: When the first order cancelled things were suppressed and we never assigned barcodes or call numbers; when we go to place the second order should we be able to reuse the item and holding, or should I keep the old ones and create new ones. KM asks if we could reuse the order.  Voice of the call was that reuse of the orders wasn't OK, but reusing the holdings and the items was fine. Reuse of order was not liked as it would loose order history. Sara Colglazier confirms that it's important that orders can exist without inventory links, for these kinds of cases. Virginia Martin supports the order-without-inventory use case.

App Interaction Group: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/display/RM/App+Interaction+Group

Dennis Bridges: Update on full workflow workthrough/presentation for orders/invoices/payments and credits - Presentation soon - acknowledge that this is a priority and the community want to see it. Ann-Marie Breaux (Deactivated) Noted that we are more than weeks away from and end to end demo of working software. SIG will continue to see individual pieces, but the end to end review is not there yet.