Recordings are posted Here Slack channel for Q&A, discussion between meetings
Requirements details Here Additional discussion topics in Subgroup parking lot
Attendees: Ann-Marie Breaux (Deactivated) leeda.adkins@duke.edu Jennifer Eustis Timothy Watters Autumn Faulkner Robert Scheier Christie Thomas Jenn Colt Lloyd Chittenden Raegan Wiechert
Lotus
- Lotus Folijet planning: dashboard where you can see the current scope and status of Data Import work for Lotus
- Current Data Import feature development dashboard and bugfix support
Agenda topics: Morning Glory refinement
- Other things we need to consider as priorities
- Field protections (Jenn/Cornell)
- Matching issues (Jenn/Cornell)
- Expanding MARC-MARC - make sure we have Bugfest
- When you add a submatch, the results are not cut down
- Build a match for the smallest record (item) and then be able to update its associated holdings and its associated instance and its associated MARC Bib
- Matching and associated actions are challenging
- Problems with multiple 856s in the same MARC Bib
- Issues with MARC Modifications
- Hasn't been practical to use because not being able to use MARC-MARC match and not being able to nest (5C/Cornell)
- Creating/Updating multiple holdings and items from 1 MARC Bib (Christie: Chicago/Seattle PL/5C)
- Maybe a survey: top priorities for live and about-to-be-live libraries for functionality that is missing (A-M)
- Separate section of the survey: what are your library's top 3 workflows that are not supported adequately by DI today (Kiwi) (A-M)
- DI affecting Circ performance: how much is that addressed in Lotus? (A-M to PTF and Folijet)
- Delete all holdings based on an input file (Christie/Chicago)
- Jenn E/Raegan: First Single record import (Jenn) or Regular import (Raegan) of the day always bombs in their local environment
- Completes with errors
- Run the same file and job profile again and it works fine
- Still getting the resume message Jennifer E (Kiwi)
- Check MARC-Instance matching and updating the MARC. Isn't it already working?
- Update the overview in tips & tricks to identify which release something is done or planned (A-M)
- Permissions: if we make permissions more granular in Morning Glory, what distinctions would be needed?
- Data Import Permissions Refinement
- UXPROD-1384
- Current UI Permissions:
- Data Import: All permissions
- Upload files
- Assign job profiles
- Run imports
- View logs
- Settings (Data import): Can view, create, edit, remove
- All 4 profile types
- File extensions
- Field protections
- Data Import: All permissions
- Possible new permissions
- Data Import: All permissions
- Does this need to be broken down any? If so, how?
- Raegan: small library; all are fine
- Christie: mainly agree, maybe be able to have view only for logs
- If view only (cannot upload, cannot assign job profile, cannot run job); but can get to the landing page, view all/search and filter, and use hotlinks in the log details
- Settings (DI): All permissions
- How to break this down?
- View only option? Not urgent; if library doesn't want users to view, just give them DI permissions, but not DI Settings
- Separate permission for Field protections? All permissions or no permissions for Field protections
- What else?
- How to break this down?
- Data Import: All permissions
- Inventory Single Record Import has separate permissions - leave those alone?
Inventory: Import single bibliographic records
- Settings (Inventory): Configure single-record import
- Probably will leave existing Data Import permissions (all) as-is and add more restrictive permissions
- Will prevent problems from deleted permissions
- Carve out file extensions and field protections
- User admin would need to review users with current DI permissions to decide if they should be reduced to a more restricted permission
- Subgroup is fine with that
- Support for the new Inventory Admin Note (all 3 record types)
- Is there a use case for matching on the Admin Note? If yes, we'll add stories for that.
- No use case identified, especially since it's a free-text field
- If no, we'll only add stories for field mapping profiles and importing the data
- The Admin note field will not be mapped in the MARC Bib-to-Inventory Instance or MARC Holdings-to-Inventory Holdings default mappings
- When a user edits an Instance or Holdings with Source = FOLIO, the Admin note field will be editable (not controlled by the underlying SRS record)
Next week:
- Creating Invoices from MARC Bibs
- OK to assume all bibs related to 1 invoice will be in the same MARC file?
- Misc question:
- Is anyone using a match from MARC 9xx field to Item identifier field? (not the Item HRID or Item UUID)
Zoom Chat:
From Christie Thomas to Everyone 01:05 PM
MODDICORE-73 (Create/Update multiple holdings/items from 1 MARC Bib)
From Jenn Colt to Everyone 01:06 PM
MODDICORE-73
-
Getting issue details...
STATUS
From Christie Thomas to Everyone 01:08 PM
I think that the log is important! Don't get me wrong.
From Lloyd (Marmot Library Network) to Everyone 01:09 PM
By working on the logs do you mean fixing how they are slowing down loading?
From Leeda Adkins to Everyone 01:09 PM
Our acquisitions people here really want to get moving on orders
From Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone 01:11 PM
Same thing here with acq folks. We are want to be able to have working default profiles for the oclc single import, work on being able to create/update multiple hol/items, and work on data integrity and corruption issues
From Christie Thomas to Everyone 01:14 PM
the other is matching on associated records. We should be able to match on an item and then update the holdings / instance / srs bib associated with that record.
Having to have a match for each record is not a sustainable long term solution.
From Jenn Colt to Everyone 01:15 PM
Voyager couldn’t do it either that’s why people aren’t complaining here
From Christie Thomas to Everyone 01:16 PM
Really? Interesting
From Lloyd (Marmot Library Network) to Everyone 01:17 PM
A multi-tenant consortium will need multiple holdings and items.
I guess I mean a single-tenant. I get those mixed up.
From Christie Thomas to Everyone 01:21 PM
Yes, creating multiple holdings and items and then updating multiple holdings and items.
From Jenn Colt to Everyone 01:21 PM
I’m not 100% sure what the situation was with voyager but people would make items by hand for records that were supposed to get two items from import
From Christie Thomas to Everyone 01:21 PM
Also, delete all holdings and create multiple new. We used that one all of the time in OLE.
From Jenn Colt to Everyone 01:22 PM
(Which I only say to explain why Cornell hasn’t complained more, not to say it isn’t important)
From Christie Thomas to Everyone 01:33 PM
matching an instance and then updating the holdings is definitely a use case! It would also be great if we could match an instance and then update the marc bib. especially if marc to marc matching is being delayed.
From Jenn Colt to Everyone 01:33 PM
Oh right, deletes…
From Christie Thomas to Everyone 01:37 PM
Thank you, Ann-Marie!
From Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone 01:37 PM
I've had inconsistent results with marc modifications. I got create working but then a couple days later it stopped working. I've never gotten an update with marc modification working.
From Christie Thomas to Everyone 01:39 PM
We decided not to implement the marc modifications profile we were working on yet, too, because of the inconsistent results.
Inconsistent means I am probably doing something different to cause the different performance, but I do not know what that is.
From Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone 01:41 PM
Here at the 5C it's usually just one or 3 people at each institution doing it. It is a small group of people. I'm fine with these permissions.
From Jenn Colt to Everyone 01:43 PM
We need single record importers to be able to see the log
There’s part of me that would like to separate invoice, bib, and eventually orders just to avoid potential errors but I don’t think I can give that a high priority
From Jenn Colt to Everyone 01:49 PM
I am basically telling people exactly which profile to use
From Christie Thomas to Everyone 01:50 PM
That is what I am planning to do, too.
From Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone 01:50 PM
I tell people what profiles to use
From Jenn Colt to Everyone 01:51 PM
Folks have been really uninterested in learning the profile mechanics here too, they just want to know which one to run
From Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone 01:51 PM
Same here. They just want it to work
From Christie Thomas to Everyone 01:51 PM
We tested that here and it was fine.
From Autumn Faulkner (she/her) to Everyone 01:55 PM
sounds good for our needs at Michigan State!
From Raegan Wiechert to Everyone 02:00 PM
No (using Inventory Admin note as a matchpoint)
From Christie Thomas to Everyone 02:00 PM
No (using Inventory Admin note as a matchpoint)