Page Comparison

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

B.  I expect something else. 

JAC- B

JE: B

JAC- Would want to run some sort of authority matching process with $0, but would prefer authority control process is not linked to data import. 

JE: I'd like to see sort of utility where institutions can set what they want to do and when.

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

B. I expect something else. 

JAC- B

JE: B

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. 

JAC- A

JE: A

JB: A 

CT: A

JAC-Would be good if there could be a user preference that lets you choose either A or C as a default setting.

Overlay a MARC bib record with fields linked to authority records.

1. A MARC bib record has several bib field(s) linked to authority records
2. Then user overlays the MARC bib record via single record import 

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? 

A. Allow user to decide whether to keep links (if possible) OR unlink when the user takes the action to overlay record. 

B. Always preserve linking 

C. Never preserve linking. 

D. I expect something else.

Comment - Mixed based on the presence of $0 

Question 1

JAC-B

JE: B

Question 2

JAC-D

JE: D

JAC- If the overlay changes the authorized access points in the bib, never preserve linking (for those access points). If there is no change to authorized access points in the bib, preserve linking for those access points (this is a little different than being asked to link all or unlink all).

JE: In some respects, I would like the overlay to preceed where all is unlinked and then the overlay links.

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 change thus no impact to linking linking. (also applies to repeated fields)

B. I expect something else. 

JAC-A

JE: A

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 700 100 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 Assume that the matched $0 is included in the import file

A. No impact to linking to linking. (also applies to repeated fields) 

B. I expect something else.   

JAC-A

JE: A

Update bib record via data import With 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
   700
   2. 1. 100 field $a  Angeloo, Maya BUT
   the MARC bib 700
   3. 1. is linked to authority record 100 $a Angelou, Maya 
   Assume multiple 700s exist in file
   5. 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?

Update bib record via data import AND linked bib field has no $0 AND no other changes 

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. No other changes made to the linked MARC bib field 

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 700 bib field does not include $0 in the file.
   2. Has changes to uncontrolled value(s)

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)

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) 

B1. 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) 

B2. Proceed with update and we can remove the link ($9 Authority UUID) and provide a report that we removed it. 

B3. Proceed with update and we can remove the link ($9 Authority UUID) and provide no report 

B4. Check $0 value and decide whether to update (no report)

C. I expect something else 

Question 1

JAC-B

JE: B

Question 2

JAC-A

JE: C

JAC-  Would not want for data import, but would want quickMARC to auto-correct  to accurate value if typo occurs in in quickMARC.

JE: I think having some sort of utility where you can look at the report and then take action on it -auto correct, manually correct, or something else.

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 700 100 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

1. 1. this field

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. Proceed 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. (also applies to repeatable fields) 

B. I expect something else 

JAC- ?

JE: B

JAC -B

JE: B

JAC- Unsure how "We do not maintain, We maintain $0" is connected to the frequency of scenario?

JAC- B, we would expect it to update $0 and unlink from previous $0.

JE: It would be great to have the option when to run an update.

Update bib record via data import AND Linked bib field has a different $0 or no $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) .OR no $0 at all 
   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 $0that the controlled value is changed. 

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 of $0 and $d. FOLIO provides a report that informs user that  update conflicts with linked authority record. that the $d and $0 updates conflict and should be manually reviewed. 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 user to unlink authority record or allow for quickMARC to auto-correct. (Applies to repeatable fields too) 

C. I expect something else 

Question 1

JAC-B

JE: ?

Question 2

JAC-B

JE: C

JE: I feel that institutions should be able to schedule this and perhaps even the types of updates that take place.

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 AND Linked bib field has a different $0 or no $0 and change to a uncontrolled value. 

1. User updates a linked bib record via data import.
2. The import file contains a bib record with a  
   1. Several MARC bib 700 fields that are linked and some are unlinked. One of the linked MARC bib 700 field has no $0Linked 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) OR no $0 at all 
   2. And subfield $e has changed from  $e author to $e author $e narrator

Question 1: How common is this scenario? 

A. Very common . We do not maintain $0.that the controlled value is changed. 

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 Do not update the field due to the wrong $0. Flag the reason why as this record is controlled by an authority record).  FOLIO provides a report when a linked bib field has a missing $0 value. And when user attempts to edit controlled values. (Applies to repeatable fields too) 

B. Proceed with update of $0 and $e. FOLIO provides a report that informs user that the $0 update conflicts and should be manually reviewed. If user edits bib record via quickMARC then system can auto-populate $0 correct to accurate value 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 (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.  

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. 

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 elseA message/indicator can display for user to unlink authority record or allow for quickMARC to auto-correct. (Applies to repeatable fields too) 

C. I expect something else 

Question 1

JAC-B

JE: ?

Question 2

JAC-B

JAC-We want to update the data we are bringing in; we don't always want authorities app to be doing field protection for us, and when we do we want to turn it off and on.

JAC- NO

JE: No

Data import should let us upload what we want to, even if the records are poor.

JE: Linking errors should be reporting in a separate report to look at and resolve separately.