Skip to end of banner
Go to start of banner

2020-04-22 EMWG Meeting

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 3 Current »

Attendees: 

Agenda:

  • New request to join group
  • Next step for work areas
  • For Authority Management (see: Authority Management - current practice)
    • What from workflows should we continue?
    • Should there be one workflow? Many workflows?
    • What from workflows is FOLIO-relevant / should be added to FOLIO JIRA?
    • What from workflows should remain external to FOLIO/ILS?
    • Where are gaps in current workflows?


High-level items raised from 4/8 overview of current authority control practice: 

  • Authority management workflows (current): Authority Management - current practice
  • workflows:
    • authority service (weekly with MARCive for Duke) versus local effort
    • new records (auth and bib) in Connexion
    • MARCEdit for adding URIs to records
    • review unmatched headings to then match
    • embedding URI data to help disambiguate
    • unicode compliance for things not in unicode
    • shared authority file (ALMA for Penn)
    • OCLC WorldShare profile and other query processes with import job
    • Chicago has a fellow computationally comparing headings in Chicago bib records to OCLC
    • preference for OCLC records over vendor records - though this is nuanced (preference is more around vendor-neutral records for eResources)
  • Tooling:
    • ILS
    • external scripts
    • access database (used for Duke process)
    • LSTools (local at Cornell, https://confluence.cornell.edu/display/tsawg/Library+Services+Tools) → workflows for maintaining headings do not change authority records; create reports and act on bib records with those authorities. Depending on what is seen in global headings queue in Voyager, will feel more of less comfortable with auto-flips (flip example: name heading where death date was not originally in our data). Workflow engines being considered as among part of the solution for rebuilding for FOLIO. UXPROD-950
 - Rewrite Cornell’s Web based LS-Tools
  • Incorporate notes from the work areas discussion meetings. Wayne will kick off this discussion (Wayne, Jason)


Action Items:

  • No labels