2024-04-25 Metadata Management Meeting notes

Announcements

MSEARCH517

Christine Schultz-Richert

MSEARCH-517 - Getting issue details... STATUS :

• It was reported that truncation wasn’t working as expected, particularly when more than one term is used in the same query; this is because when there are multiple terms, it is treated as a single term.

  • For example: “liturgi* eastern“ will search for instances with “liturgi“ + any number of any characters + “ eastern”.

• However, the desired results for “liturgi* east*“, as an example, can be achieved by using Advanced search:

• 

  

  Christine will document the various possible searching scenarios that can currently be accomplished using advanced search.

• Question: Is this an acceptable workflow for performing truncated searches? The general consensus is that yes, using advanced search for performing truncated searches is acceptable.

• Currently there are still some “quirks” with searching, for example if you don’t add an asterisk to the beginning of a search term when doing a truncated search, you may not get expected search results. Christine is investigating.

• In some systems you have a character you can use that indicates that there MIGHT be another character and in some systems you can indicate that there HAS TO BE another character – this is outlined on the search criteria website as “Masking” a single character. ; Example from Felix: Example: mar#e finds marke and mare; mar!e finds marie and marke, but not mare; there is a Jira for this that has been closed but now that we have elastic search it should be possible:

  1. UIIN-1043

  Search. Implement search using mask of one character (Instance, Holdings and Item segment)

Change Tracker (including LC requirements)

Khalilah Gambrell

Kristy Darby

jeff gerhard

UXPROD-910 - Getting issue details... STATUS

UXPROD-4125 - Getting issue details... STATUS

Orders App implemented a Version History to track changes to a record:

Feedback on this: Sara C. thinks it is great. You can click on a previous change, the change is then highlighted in the record which is quite helpful. One thing that is really helpful is the date/timestamp and the source info but she thinks this could be problematic in Inventory (some libraries may not want this information to be displayed) so it would be great to have this as an option at the tenant level. KG agrees that when we write this requirement this will have to be considered (for any app that implements this kind of change tracker history). Jennifer E. thinks the highlighting is really wonderful and that this is a great start – easy and intuitive.

The idea is that the look and feel of the history/changes would be consistent across apps. When LC saw what was happening with change tracker in orders, they liked it and want it for Inventory. Inventory is a bit different--there are updates to MARC and there are updates to the FOLIO record (different combinations to consider). How to show the story of the changes of the record. So for now there is a “version 1” in development – this would include who made the change and the date/time of when the change was made. Feedback: Jeff G. Version one seems like it should be acceptable (will have to come back with an official LC response). Requirements for tracking cataloging work does not seem identical to a version history--at LC a lot of info gets tracked that is different than a version history. KG is proposing it gets more granular with the field updates. Laura D. Seconds what Jeff said--other institutions do also want to track the type of thing that has changed (who, what, when, where). She would like to see the change tracker but also a way to track productivity. She wants to use custom fields to help with that--not every institution needs to track the same things. Charlotte in chat: The European libraries can not track productivity due to GDPR. Felix: It's not only GDPR, but also federal law and workers rights. Sara C. We don’t necessarily need the detail of change tracker in Inventory that we have in Orders. Changes to an Inventory record will have much more detail over time than order records. In her old system, she could limit the timeframe of when changes were made. It would be nice to be able to limit change tracking results to a certain timeframe. KG sounds like from an Inventory perspective, we may not need to detail every single field change but we want a history of each update including who made the update and when, and we want to be able to query based on a timestamp or operator.

Question from Felix in chat: have you considered privacy and data protection, e.g. "data minimisation". Can the tracker be turned off or configured that it is not stored who changed a record and when? KG: This topic came up in the Acq subgroup--how NOT to track who did what. This will have to be a tenant level configuration for this as an option. Perhaps at a global level, not just Inventory.

Sara C: How will this work in Instances vs. MARC source? KG: that is what the development team needs to think through. That will be a tough one. What would be your expectation in a scenario where you are updating the MARC record that is mapped to a FOLIO field, what would you want to be displayed in the history? If you make a change in QuickMARC the change date is also displayed on the Instance record. Sarah C: Not everything from the MARC source is mapped to the Instance. In Five Colleges we may have many holdings, how do we know which one was changed without opening it up? KG: In the Instance record, we could have an icon for a change history pane that would display change history for Instance/bib record and then a separate icon within the holdings record, item records. Laura D : the distinction does matter to me, that is, did the Instance change because the MARC changed vs did something specific to the Instance only change (or was the MARC changed but nothing in the Instance actually changed) Lynne F: like statistical code changes only happen in the Instance and not MARC. Laura D : holdings and items need their own change logs, especially since they can be moved from one instance to another, and I'd assume that moving an item or holding would be considered changes to be tracked also Charlotte: Yes we definitely need to distinct between instances and MARC updates in SRS. It’s not all libraries who has underlying MARC records in SRS. E.g. all the German libraries, do not have MARC and SRS interaction with Inventory

Jeff G: I think I could live with a separate MARC change tracker that only displays when in QuickMARC

Lynne F: I would love a way of comparing the current vs. previous version and a way of reverting to a previous version if a change was made that shouldn't have happened

Raegan W: Having different logs in each record type makes sense.

Sara C: How to know which Holdings or Items has been updated (when doing a query based on timestamp and retrieving an Instance record)? KG this will likely need its own feature to address this scenario, but perhaps there is something to consider to make it easier to discern which holding/item was changed (like highlighting)

Lynne F: Seem like it's tied to the Results list view enhancement that we talked about a long time ago

Jennifer E: Are there thoughts about displaying a limited number of changes in the UI configurable at the tenant level and the ability to download all changes for a record? KG: I hadn’t thought about the ability to download the changes for the V1. I am also hoping that the List App could potentially address this too--it will have Instance, Holding and Items records, it won’t track MARC anytime soon which would be the only challenge. Create and update field is already handled by the List App..so it would need to track the “who”. Is this a requirement for V1 – to be able to download the history for the record? Jennifer E: No, not required for V1. It might be nice to just display a limited amount of history but then be able to download a full (long) history if necessary. Also, having the Dashboard App to alert you to changes.

Sara C: would a fair compromise be for version 1, instead of saying exactly who, would it be OK to just show if a human operator (“user”) made the change versus the “system” making the change? KG: How important is it to know the user who made the change? Jennifer E: this is important to know at the item level for her institution; Jeff G: At library of congress, we do have use cases for individual persons. We could discuss this internally though.

Quesnelia key bugs & enhancements addressed

Khalilah Gambrell

Slides

PC updates

Charlotte Whitt

2024-04-25 Product Council Agenda and Meeting Notes

Announcements:

Jennifer Eustis: There will be a demo of ECS functionality at an upcoming MM-SIG meeting.

Next Asian-Pasific Friendly meeting will be on 7/4/2024

Next steps on FOLIO China Community Questions:

Document shared by Gang Zhou. The Chinese version of FOLIO is on Goldenrod. #1 Request for CNMARC support (data import/data export), might be work the Chinese community can donate back to the Community. #9 this is topic Cornell is interested in too. #2 The new development on BibFrame editor for LC will be supporting BibFrame 2.0. Owen suggests the topics to be added to the FOLIO Backlog as feature requests. A small PC working group can help group the different topics, and identify development team and respective PO.

Planning for Authentication changes and Application Formalization:

Possible impacts of platform changes on FOLIO Roadmap and governance:

4/24/2024 - a TC meeting dedicated the topic:

Meeting notes: 2024-04-24 - Architectural PoC

Recording: https://recordings.openlibraryfoundation.org/folio/tech-council/2024-04-24T10:50/

The new work is happening to support the LC migration, and to be compliant with FedRAMP (Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program) requirements, and possible also EU regulations. Reassuring that the changes are not requiring the existing modules to be rewritten. Important that the PC can guide libraries, who will be moving to the new Eureka architecture - e.g. the North American libraries hosted by EBSCO.

Libraries who are selfhosted or hosted by Index Data will also need to prepare for taking the new architecture in use.

It will be possible to have two platform/environments running in parallel, but that raise other questions; e.g. if there will then be two different Bugfest test tracks etc.

BELA (Bulk Edit and Lists App)

Jennifer Eustis

No meeting this week

Data Import Working Group

Jennifer Eustis

2024-4-24 Data Import Subgroup meeting . CSP #4 has been released and there will be a CSP #5. We cleaned up our agenda. The working group will also be working on a scheduling topics a couple of weeks in advance. This will help also create a roadmap.

quickMARC Subgroup update

Raegan Wiechert

No meeting this week