| | |
|---|
| 1 | Why should the 001 be editable? | Libraries that move from one network to another (currently one at the database level) This topic requires a broader discussion. While some use cases may exist, generally the 001 should not be editable through the UI (Stanford).
|
| 2 | Feedback mentioned that configuration settings require a link - the Base URL is not currently a required field in the settings. If no Base URL is added to the settings, nothing will be inserted into the $0 except for the identifier. Are we talk about the fact that the $0 is inserted into the MARC bib heading when linked? | While Base URL is not a required field, it must be unique; therefore, it is not possible to re-use a Base URL in a configuration for a local setting or to augment a system default setting. This only came to light after not being able to make edits to the values of the prefix field (Stanford). We wonder why users can edit the default settings for Base URL but not other fields (Stanford).
|
| 3 | What are the use cases for not requiring the “HRID starts with” value? This is currently following the pattern of Inventory; what are the use cases for making the behavior different? | It’s confusing that the “HRID starts with” field is blank for all of the system default authority settings but required for new or local settings. As a new FOLIO user, I do not know what I’m supposed to put in this field. This requirement means I can’t enter some of the authority settings and then enter in the “HRID starts with” number later. This seems to assume a particular workflow pattern. As someone who doesn’t work in inventory elsewhere, the existing pattern is not clear to me. Documentation or a tool tip explaining that this field is for use with local authorities newly created in FOLIO would help. Documentation and communication around how the “HRID starts with” value impacts new authority creation would also be a plus (Stanford).
|
| 4 | Regarding feedback about the inability to edit existing files or add a new row for existing files: are these the issues we’re experiencing: Existing (FOLIO) authority files cannot be edited - meaning the prefix(es) cannot be edited? Prefixes cannot be changed for local authority files if there are existing MARC authority records assigned to the file?
Others? For each issue, any use cases would be helpful. | The prefixes cannot be edited in default authorities settings. According to this documentation, the prefix case should not be sensitive; however, we have “GSAFD” in our 001s that are not being recognized by FOLIO’s default authority settings of “gsafd”). Preliminary testing illustrates that the prefix field values are case sensitive. Since the Base URL needs to be unique, it can’t be augmented with a duplicate, local configuration. Otherwise, we need to rewrite our 001s to match the case in the FOLIO MARC authority settings. It is not currently possible to match on UUID due to limitations in field mapping profiles. It is not possible to update the case in the 001 due to case-matching. Since the case may change in the future, it seems like addressing case sensitivity and making the prefix field configurable is our preferred solution (Stanford). We have additional codes for some RBMS vocabularies that aren’t being identified by the authority settings because they aren’t included in the default prefix settings for RBMS. Since we can’t edit the prefix field and add these codes, we need to add an additional local configuration. This isn’t ideal because we might have many subcodes that don’t need to be separated out, for example: RBMS binding vocabulary with code “rbbin”. We cannot do this if the Base URL needs to be unique, so in testing we have left out the Base URL (Stanford). Prefixes cannot be changed for local authority files if there are existing MARC authority records assigned to the file (Stanford). Error toast that appears when you try to change a prefix for an authority that is in use (“authority records are assigned to this authority file” There will be use cases when we need to update a prefix or Base URL in authority settings that is in use in FOLIO. Managing MARC authorities that are published as linked data is one use case, While uncommon, URLs may also change. We wonder how the relationship between an authority’s settings and its linking to records relates to global updates through the MARC authorities app. Does this exist? More documentation on this topic would be helpful.
|
| 5 | Are there any authority files for which the 001 in the MARC authority record is the only identifier for the file? | |
