| Productivity Stats Proposal | | Vision Tracking of statistics such as how much cataloging of a certain type an individual does on a particular date. The "Vision" statement link above leads to a "medium" term and long term solution. Essence: | MARC data in FOLIO | Laura E Daniels | Thanks to everyone in the community who helped pull together requirements and recommendations in December. Here's what was shared with PC | Productivity Stats Proposal | Laura E Daniels Jacquie Samples Jesse Lambertson Natalie Sommerville Felicia Piscitelli (TAMU) Julia Corrice (Cornell)"We recommend a new five-part element, to be located at the bottom of the instance, holdings, and item records, that can capture the date/time, userid*, and allow for the recording of a transaction type code, a location code (e.g., a unit library or a department), and a free-text note field. *or other code (GDPR)" Conversation and concerns about privacy. The critical issue is the ability to track a person and time, which is something not allowed. - Rita Albrecht pointed out, which is common outside of the US. Chat:
From Christie Thomas to Everyone: 12:14 PM
We do not want to use 9xx! We are being forced to.
From Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone: 12:17 PM
We have done something similar in the past at UMass for order information since all orders had/have a bib record.
From Jenn Colt (she/her) to Everyone: 12:18 PM
We have similar, I thought we would just keep doing them in the marc by updating the marc to instance map
From Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone: 12:18 PM
We also have unusual notes for equipment which will not have a MARC srs but only records in FOLIO inventory. Some of these notes are administrative and others are for checkin info
From Jesse Lambertson to Everyone: 12:18 PM
Yep, Jennifer
From Ann Kardos (she/her) to Everyone: 12:19 PM
+1 Jennifer eustis
From pratkovi to Everyone: 12:19 PM
+1 Jennifer
From Ann Kardos (she/her) to Everyone: 12:19 PM
I forgot about those
From Jenn Colt (she/her) to Everyone: 12:19 PM
is versioning of this not a concern?
From Ann-Marie Breaux to Everyone: 12:19 PM
If there are instances that are source = FOLIO you can add whatever type of note you want to the instance
From Jenn Colt (she/her) to Everyone: 12:19 PM
(ie we have multiple 948(
From Jesse Lambertson to Everyone: 12:20 PM
Ann-Marie, that is another of our thinking steps
From Ann-Marie Breaux to Everyone: 12:20 PM
And if it's a check-in note, then there's a spot in the item record for that, which will cause it to display when an item is checked in
From Jacquie Samples to Everyone: 12:20 PM
Notes in Admin module would need to be repeatable. I forgot to put that in the vision doc.
From Christie Thomas to Everyone: 12:20 PM
+1 to Jenn COlt - that is our solution, but it is difficult to create a brief MARC record in FOLIO right now.
From Jesse Lambertson to Everyone: 12:21 PM
tis
From Christie Thomas to Everyone: 12:21 PM
We will need to go to OCLC and create a brief local record, export it, then import it, then add the 9xx note.
From Piscitelli, Felicia A to Everyone: 12:21 PM
Yes, repeatability would be good
From Jenn Colt (she/her) to Everyone: 12:21 PM
ick
From Charlotte Whitt to Everyone: 12:21 PM
Just drafted this feature: UXPROD-2863 Productivity Statistics in Inventory
From Jesse Lambertson to Everyone: 12:21 PM
thanks Charlotte
From Jacquie Samples to Everyone: 12:22 PM
Thanks for being so speedy, Charlotte!
From Piscitelli, Felicia A to Everyone: 12:22 PM
Thank you, Charlotte
From Christie Thomas to Everyone: 12:23 PM
Custom fields would work for us as long as we could search for them in LDP
From Jessica Janecki to Everyone: 12:23 PM
I thought custom fields were searchable in query searc. Query search is in FOLIO.
From Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone: 12:24 PM
+1 to Christie's comment. If we can find it in LDP, then we could also get total counts on the transactions or what ever the field is containing this info
From Jacquie Samples to Everyone: 12:25 PM
For troubleshooting, searching custom fields from within FOLIO is preferred. For reporting and potential batch updates, then finding via LDP is preferred. *by me at Duke.
From Joshua Barton to Everyone: 12:25 PM
Sorry: what is LDP?
From Laura Daniels (she|her) to Everyone: 12:26 PM
library data platform
From Jesse Lambertson to Everyone: 12:26 PM
+ (ad infinitum) :)
From Ann Kardos (she/her) to Everyone: 12:26 PM
I’m good with LDP
From Laura Daniels (she|her) to Everyone: 12:26 PM
it's the reporting tool being developed w/in the FOLIO community
From Ann Kardos (she/her) to Everyone: 12:26 PM
++++++ from me too I would prefer to run searches in a reporting tool rather than inventory
From Jenn Colt (she/her) to Everyone: 12:26 PM
doing it in ldp would be pretty parallel to our productivity statistics reports that we do monthly
From Ann Kardos (she/her) to Everyone: 12:27 PM
Well, the search in inventory needs to be better
From Jesse Lambertson to Everyone: 12:27 PM
very helpful everyone
From Jacquie Samples to Everyone: 12:27 PM
+1 Ann
From Charlotte Whitt to Everyone: 12:29 PM
+ Ann — hopefully the Elastic Search tool can be the strong replace of the current solution
From Jesse Lambertson to Everyone: 12:31 PM
this is a great point yea, consistency is important
From Jacquie Samples to Everyone: 12:34 PM
App Interaction SIG would be a place to go, too, I believe.
From Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone: 12:39 PM
Being able to filter is a nice feature
From Charlotte Whitt to Everyone: 12:39 PM
(y)
From Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone: 12:40 PM
It would be great to have the Name of the supplementary properties in the Settings so that people could add their own local ones
From Jacquie Samples to Everyone: 12:41 PM
Could this type of function be added to the Admin accordion for Instances? This seems like a good place for this type of data to land.
From Felix Hemme (ZBW) to Everyone: 12:41 PM
A library could decide to display the public note in the patron facing Discovery System.
From Jenn Colt (she/her) to Everyone: 12:41 PM
we use this to display ToU in the public catalog and it obeys the visibility setting
From Felix Hemme (ZBW) to Everyone: 12:41 PM
Thanks Martina!
From Jackie Gottlieb to Everyone: 12:42 PM
Elastic Search has been identified as the way we will be able to search/index custom fields: | Jira Legacy |
|---|
| server | System JIRA |
|---|
| serverId | 01505d01-b853-3c2e-90f1-ee9b165564fc |
|---|
| key | DEBT-18 |
|---|
|
Falcon is the team that is working this for R1. It was documented that Magda Zacharska - new PO for implementation of Elastic Search. That is the most current update I can find.
From Jenn Colt (she/her) to Everyone: 12:47 PM
it would be good to have them united, the backend of the erm ref data settings and how they handle uuids is a little wonky having the addresses in the tenant settings is one of these imo
From Martina Schildt to Everyone: 12:48 PM
Supplementary properties are CRUDable in settings.
From Jenn Colt (she/her) to Everyone: 12:48 PM
yes
|
| Documentation/Training resources planning | Laura E Daniels | Need to coordinate efforts so we can have instructions for our local institutions as well as the ability to share them with others. Approaches? Areas of interest? Please reach out to Laura. Charlotte suggested using docs.folio.org Video vs. written documentation? Charlotte suggested gathering all MM SIG videos into one document to see what we have already.
|
