2022-01-18 Acquisitions Meeting notes

Owned by Heather McMillan
Jan 21, 2022

Date

Attendees

Agenda

  • Housekeeping

    • reminder - please participate if you can "EDIFACT order export UAT" (scheduled for 1/18/22 - 1/20/22)

    Business

    • EDIFACT (reserves 15 minutes Ann-Marie Breaux) 
    • CONTINUE to discuss allowing users to edit invoice subscription dates after the invoice is approved or paid

Discussion items

TimeItemWhoNotes

"EDIFCT order export UAT"

"EDIFACT order export UAT"

DennisDennis
  • "EDIFACT order export UAT" part 1 has started"EDIFACT order export UAT" part 1 has started
  • There were some problems this mornin, but it has all be fixe. 
  • Posted the form ltl bit ago. If you want to participate, click the for and follow the instructions. 
  • Y
  • There were some problems this morning, but it has all been fixed. 
  • Posted the form a little bit ago. If you want to participate, click the form and follow the instructions. 
  • Y

Ann-Marie
  • Are there any library's that have POL's with ultipl lcaions/funds that will b endingediact ders?
    • Silence frome group. 
    • From La Smith to Everyone 12:09 PM
      MSU does have some orders withsplit funds; it's possible we would send via edifact.
  • Place of publiction: We will leave out. 
  • Material type: On the POL, material type is not always filled in. If you are not creatin an itm, this is't require. 
    • If no mterial types specified in he ordr, it will be oitted. 
    • If multiple formats listed, (print plus online material) what should we do?
      • Could repeat the field?
      • Dennis: Give the vendor as much information as possible. Sending a material type of multi isn't useful other then they'd have to ask for more information. 
      • nn-Marie: Will repeat the field, and put the separate material types in different fields. 
    • When ordering P/E mix, there is a quantity of 1 for physial and 1 for online. Devs were asking if in he order export should t be 2?
      • Ann-Marie: In my mind, n. It should be 1. 
      • Sara Colglazier: Agree, We are payig for 1 order,that we get dfferen things with. 
    • Ann-Mari: Can the quantity of physical and electronic ever be different?
      • Fro Peter Sbrzeny to Everyone 12:24 PM We would not do that.
      • From Masayo Uchiyama to Everyone 12:24 PM We would not do this either.
      • From Lisa Smith to Everyone 12:25 PM I agree with quantity 1 (1 p/e item)
      • From Peter Sbrzesny to Everyone 12:25 PM +1 for quantity 1
  • Ann Marie, can quantity be associated with material type if material type is used?  
    • Ann-Marie: I am 65% sure they are not associated with each other, I will double check. 
  • Ann-Marie: So the rule will be: We will not sum the numbers. If the quantities are not equal, take the higher number.  If strange numbers, will likely have a note for the vendor. 
  • Dennis: Someday will be able to have a 0 for quantity. 
    • From Sara Colglazier (MHC/5C) to Everyone 12:26 PM +1 looking forward to being able to have a 0 for Quantity
  • Note to vendor question: 
    • his is not currentl in the outut. Do libraries feel like theris a need to have this at the po level or just at the pol level. 
      • Never mind: Folio onl has the note to vendor at the pol level. So will leave it there for order exports. 
  • Ann-Marie: Need to take into accnt: the field whee he fund code is output, n edifact for thi is RFF plus b fn field. What we're intending to do is if you're using a find an expense class, we are out putting both of those separated by a colon.  But that is tricy;we're going to have to do something with t output to make su that it's being treated as kind of a break between fund and expense class versus the normal meaning that is in effect for the colon
  • Ann-Marie:Another note: Currently there i not a fild forthe VendorReference number, bu yumy have one becaue there i a title number from the vendor. Need to have a spot to put it when exportn the order. 
  • Dug-Lan:Mono hist expense clss is moreimportant than the fnd. Folio output both. Chck with vendoon whether they could only pull the expense clss from the fu. 
  • FromPeter Sbrzesny to Everyone 12:37 PM We definitely need fund plus expense class for each order.
  • From Lisa Smith to Everyone 12:38 PM Can we edifact fund only, if we are using expense classes?
    • Dennis: We would need some kind of configuration. Within one file, we should be able to configure that.  Dennis will look into that.  
  • Libraries: If questions about fundexpense class handling, check with your vendor(s). 
  • Sara Colglazier: What about when you have an approval plan and the records automate a load. 
    • Ann-Marie: I think you'll be fine. 
  • From Julie Brannon (sheher)Everyone 12:54 PM Did I hear Ann-Marie report that importing order in MARC format is at risk for slipping from Morning Glory (and alrady sippd from Lotus)?  It has onsistenlybeen rnkedhighly through the pointing exercise etc.  How can we avocate strongly for this? UXPROD-185 - Getting issue details... STATUS
    • Ann-Marie: Yes, it is at risk. 
    • From Kristin Martin to Everyone 12:55 PM We have certainly advocated for it! 
    • Kristin: We do have a work arond. 
  • Ann-Marie: Draft plans for Morning Glory arue th end of January 

Ann-Marie
  • Are there any library's that have POL's with multiple locations/funds that will be sending edifact orders?
    • Silence from the group. 
    • From Lisa Smith to Everyone 12:09 PM
      MSU does have some orders with split funds; it's possible we would send via edifact.
  • Place of publication: We will leave out. 
  • Material type: On the POL, material type is not always filled in. If you are not creating an item, this isn't required. 
    • If no material type is specified in the order, it will be omitted. 
    • If multiple formats listed, (print plus online material) what should we do?
      • Could repeat the field?
      • Dennis: Give the vendor as much information as possible. Sending a material type of multi isn't useful other then they'd have to ask for more information. 
      • Ann-Marie: Will repeat the field, and put the separate material types in different fields. 
    • When ordering P/E mix, there is a quantity of 1 for physical and 1 for online. Devs were asking if in the order export should it be 2?
      • Ann-Marie: In my mind, no. It should be 1. 
      • Sara Colglazier: Agree, We are paying for 1 order, that we get different things with. 
    • Ann-Marie: Can the quantity of physical and electronic ever be different?
      • From Peter Sbrzesny to Everyone 12:24 PM We would not do that.
      • From Masayo Uchiyama to Everyone 12:24 PM We would not do this either.
      • From Lisa Smith to Everyone 12:25 PM I agree with quantity 1 (1 p/e item)
      • From Peter Sbrzesny to Everyone 12:25 PM +1 for quantity 1
  • From Dung-Lan Chen to Everyone 12:21 PM Ann Marie, can quantity be associated with material type if material type is used?  
    • Ann-Marie: I am 65% sure they are not associated with each other, I will double check. 
  • Ann-Marie: So the rule will be: We will not sum the numbers. If the quantities are not equal, take the higher number.  If strange numbers, will likely have a note for the vendor. 
  • Dennis: Someday will be able to have a 0 for quantity. 
    • From Sara Colglazier (MHC/5C) to Everyone 12:26 PM +1 looking forward to being able to have a 0 for Quantity
  • Note to vendor question: 
    • This is not currently in the output. Do libraries feel like there is a need to have this at the po level or just at the pol level. 
      • Never mind: Folio only has the note to vendor at the pol level. So will leave it there for order exports. 
  • Ann-Marie: Need to take into account: the field where  the fund code is output, an edifact for this is RFF plus b fn field. What we're intending to do is if you're using a find an expense class, we are out putting both of those separated by a colon.  But that is tricky; we're going to have to do something with the output to make sure that it's being treated as kind of a break between fund and expense class versus the normal meaning that is in effect for the colon.
  • Ann-Marie: Another note: Currently there is not a field for the Vendor Reference number, but you may have one because there is a title number from the vendor. Need to have a spot to put it when exporting the order. 
  • Dung-Lan: Mono hist expense class is more important than the fund. Folio outputs both. Check with vendor on whether they could only pull the expense class from the fund. 
  • From Peter Sbrzesny to Everyone 12:37 PM We definitely need fund plus expense class for each order.
  • From Lisa Smith to Everyone 12:38 PM Can we edifact fund only, if we are using expense classes?
    • Dennis: We would need some kind of configuration. Within one file, we should be able to configure that.  Dennis will look into that.  
  • Libraries: If questions about fund/expense class handling, check with your vendor(s). 
  • Sara Colglazier: What about when you have an approval plan and the records automate a load. 
    • Ann-Marie: I think you'll be fine. 
  • From Julie Brannon (she/her) to Everyone 12:54 PM Did I hear Ann-Marie report that importing orders in MARC format is at risk for slipping from Morning Glory (and already slipped from Lotus)?  It has consistently been ranked highly through the pointing exercise etc.  How can we advocate strongly for this? UXPROD-185 - Getting issue details... STATUS
    • Ann-Marie: Yes, it is at risk. 
    • From Kristin Martin to Everyone 12:55 PM We have certainly advocated for it! 
    • Kristin: We do have a work around. 
  • Ann-Marie: Draft plans for Morning Glory are due at the end of January. 




Closed captionClosed caption