| | | |
|---|
:00 | Housekeeping | Dung-Lan | Housekeeping - Bindery support UAT will run starting August 7 (Wednesday) thru August 13 (Tuesday) - we appreciate your participation and any feedback you might have! Reminder - prioritizing acq-sig-topics voting (details here) Next meeting - Tuesday, August 13th, at 1 pm Eastern
|
:08 | Implementers Topic #131 | | Implementers Topic #131 Orders: display of prefix and suffix at PO numbers Currently, prefixes and suffixes are displayed connected to the PO number. They can only be separated by adding letters to the prefix or suffix. We would like to visually separate both prefixes and suffixes with special characters (e.g. "-"). This would increase readability. Dennis: You don’t want Folio to add the special character, you just want a visual separation between them. Aaron: We decided against using suffixes because of the lack of ability to distinguish from the po number. Susie Skowronek - Oakland University 12:12 PM
We could not add hyphens to suffixes and prefixes during implementation. Aaron: For the suffix, would you want to see the character there or not on the filters? Dennis: What about other places the po is displayed? Would you expect to see the same visual separation to exist in the header for example? We can make an argument that consistency would be helpful for for readability. Kristin: Would anyone that copied and pasted that number elsewhere, would they still get the po they wanted if the special character is included? Aaron Neslin 12:15 PM
+1 for consistency
|
:21
| Implementers Topic #130
| Kimberly Smith (MTSU)
| Implementers Topic #130 Display Agreement Line Description in POL instead of Agreement Name In the Linked Agreement Lines section of the POL the links to the Agreement Lines are actually displaying the Agreement Name not the Agreement Line Description (name). In Slack Owen Stephens said he can provide the properties needed to fix this.
Kristin Martin 12:24 PM
Makes sense to me. Since it's called "Agreement Line" in the POL. Dennis: It makes sense that we go in a hierarchy and show if there's a description. Is it possible to have multiple packages in an agreement? Kimberly Smith: We are using this agreement section to track pricing over different periods, so for us its just one. Molly Driscoll 12:26 PM
Yes, FOLIO supports multiple agreement lines per agreement.
But each agreement line can only be linked to a single package.
Dennis: Where does the name come from” Molly Driscoll 12:33 PM
Dennis, this story may be relevant to the topic you're writing up as well: Dennis will reach out to Owen.
|
:30 | Implementers Topic #131 | | Implementers Topic #131 Invoices: Include Invoice date in exported vouchers Currently the Invoice date field is not included in Vouchers. Our Accounts Payable office requires this field so when we use Voucher Export to batch export vouchers we still have to look up the Invoice dates separately. This change would simplify our process significantly. Dennis: Are there any others that would require the invoice date?
|
:40 | Implementers Topic #133 | | Implementers Topic #133 Orders/Inventory: Move holding/item data in Inventory should update POL-Instance connection accordingly Move of holdings/items from one instance to another won't transfer the POL information from the origin to the target instance. Existing JIRAs: Workaround: initiate the move from the order rather than the inventory record for any inventory records that have related acq data. But: Initiating the transfer in the Orders app won't work in all scenarios, e.g. when the move of holdings is triggered in an external source and not from within FOLIO. That will most likely apply in other libraries as well, in case they let their Inventory be controlled from an external system like a union catalog. Dennis: There are significant technical hurdles here. (Dennis discussed them at :43-44) Acq Interaction might be a good place for the discussion. Peter: This is really important for all the Gb Libraries because we are working with the union catalog. Need to come back to when Kristin is here. Kimberly Smith (MTSU) 12:46 PM
Our systems group has an API that removes inventory marked for deletion currently at our location. Susanne Gill (BVB) 12:47 PM
+1 for Peter
|
:48 | Implementers Topic #137 | Lisa Smith (Mich state) | Implementers Topic #137 Unlink orders from instance When we withdraw items, we have been suppressing and marking instances for deletion, thinking that someday we will be able to delete instances. When an instance has a linked order, we've been suppressing the instance only. We'd like to ability to unlink the order from the instance, so that the instance can be deleted, but we'd like to retain the order details in the order record. Is this possible?? We can’t delete Instances currently. We would like to retain pricing information, invoice information…. Dennis: You are thinking about this because you are withdrawing instances but wanting to maintain the order information. Kristin Martin: How long do you want to retain the order information for? What’s the use case for keeping the information? Lisa Smith: When we were a Sierra library we purged records when we had to. But when we got to a place where we didn’t have to, we kept orders forever. I can see holding order records forever, at least for 7 years though the audit period.
Lisa Smith, Mich State 12:54 PM
Interesting! Dennis: This has been a difficult topic for a while. How we we keep from corrupting data in other applications when you are deleting stuff or changing the relationship of records that another app might be expecting to be constant. Lisa Smith: I know it can be confusing because sometimes you want it to change, and sometime you don’t. Dennis: I assume if you are withdrawing you are removing the instance and holding item as well. (yes) Molly Driscoll 12:57 PM
It would be cool if this operated like when an authority record is deleted while liked to a bib. The authorized value is maintained, but not the link itself.
linked to a bib*
|
