2024-02-23 Meeting notes (Kick-off meetings)
Date
Feb 21, 2024
First option: Topic: FOLIO Linked Data Subgroup Kickoff 1
Time: Feb 23, 2024 07:00 Eastern Time (US and Canada)Join Zoom Meeting
https://cornell.zoom.us/j/94439971047?pwd=WGRQVko0Nk01L0I1bUp0Sk90dGRtdz09 Meeting ID: 944 3997 1047
Passcode: folio-lsp
Second option:
opic: FOLIO Linked Data Subgroup Kickoff2
Time: Feb 23, 2024 15:00 Eastern Time (US and Canada)Join Zoom Meeting
https://cornell.zoom.us/j/94037770554?pwd=aDc5OHdSUWNXQXU4K0NQcG1kcWZ4QT09 Meeting ID: 940 3777 0554
Passcode: folio-lsp
Participants – please note which session (option 1 or option 2) attended
@Laura E Daniels (both sessions)
Chris Long (both sessions)
@Amanda Ros @Lisa Furubotten @Jeannette Ho Charity Stokes (Texas A&M, session 2)
@Andreas Mace @Charlotte Whitt (session 1)
@Sebastian Hammer @Wayne Schneider (session 2)
Goals
Discussion topics
Time | Item | Presenter | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
5-10 minutes | Brief introductions |
| |
15 minutes | Meetings & communication |
| |
15 minutes | Draft charge |
|
|
| WOLFCon 2024 planning? |
|
|
Linked Open Data in FOLIO Charge (DRAFT) WORKING DOCUMENT HERE
Linked Open Data in FOLIO is a subgroup organized within the Metadata Management Special Interest Group with membership open to all members of the FOLIO community.
The subgroup is focused on the following:
Exploring, documenting, and sharing information about development related to linked data within the FOLIO community.
Informing development of linked data tools in FOLIO.
Informing PC of community requirements for linked data tools.
Defining and documenting community requirements around implementing linked data within the FOLIO environment, especially regarding the transition from creating MARC data to linked data.
Advocating for best practices for linked data and entity management in FOLIO.
Identifying and exploring challenges libraries will face working in a data-format agnostic environment.
Notes from meeting 1:
Meeting frequency and times?
weekly? biweekly? monthly?
general consensus was that monthly is too infrequent for effective engagement
Fridays may be the best meeting day, given that other FOLIO groups don’t tend to meet
Communication Methods?
Possibly one of this group’s biggest challenges since participants in this group cover a wide range of time zones
Koha community as an example – dual meetings to fit multiple time zones – rotating meeting times
using Slack
reminder: some folks don’t have the flexibility to work outside of their normal business hours
Course management tools? although they mainly use Google docs and Slack, which we already use
consensus to continue using existing Linked Data Slack channel rather than create a new one
Notes on draft charge/purpose/focus of this group
two general approaches were discussed
developer-driven approach
investigating what solutions are out there and helping libraries decide what works best for them
having vendors/providers(?) gather the requirements for their solutions – libraries can pick and choose which solution works best for them
library community-driven approach
have library community define its basic needs to inform providers
identifying library community needs that should be met by the developments underway and provide a venue for stakeholders to have input on developments
lobby/encourage the various developers to work together – have library community determine what it wants
should it part of our charge be to inform PC about our linked data requirements?
other topics discussed
how can this group influence developments even though we might not have agency to act?
everyone’s needs are potential/future needs – do libraries accurately understand or predict their future needs?
Is there a better home for this subgroup, or should it be a SIG? – consensus was yes to SIG eventually
Ideas for WOLFCon?
workshop –
opportunity to inform developers instead of vice versa – “this is the solution we envision”
what are the options, projects being worked on?
how is data being stored, interacts with Inventory, UI?
should think about length of workshop – 1 hour not adequate
or should it be in a pre-conference slot?
2-3 hours at least
Future Meetings for Subgroup
have developers present what they’re working on
introduction to linked data for beginners (maybe for WOLFCon?)
Notes from meeting 2:
Meeting frequency and times? And Communication methds
what sort of cadence/schedule will work? what sort of asynchronous communication might work?
in addition to Zoom meetings, work asynchronously via Slack/Google docs
more tools = more friction & overhead, don’t introduce something new if not necessary!
better to have something scheduled more frequently and cancel if no agenda
weekly seems too intense, monthly not enough - biweekly, though challenging to schedule, feels right
Notes on draft charge/purpose/focus of this group
Thoughts about the landscape: when FOLIO began, no real picture of what technical infrastructure would look like for Bibframe outside of the library, e.g., storage, exchange, access to data; within last 12 months there are multiple different commercially supported bibliographic infrastructures based on BF in development/underway (OCLC, ExLibris, MARVA/Bibliograph, ShareVDE), at least 2 of which have ambitions to intersect with FOLIO and there is also Sinopia (Sinolio) & Blue Core – we have gone from nothing to “being spoiled for choice” –
How do we talk about capabilities, integration:
What questions should we be asking in RFPs
Use this group to get info on what’s planned, capture similarities & differences -->better understanding of landscape, trends and patterns, planned integration w/local LMSs
Surveying & Categorizing emergent bf infrastructure & technologies
Advocating for community-based approach, e.g., everyone has equal opportunity to participate in linked data in FOLIO; not separate pools that can’t interact
There will be commonalities between platforms we need to integrate with; identify commonalities among integration requirements → ways FOLIO can talk to linked data stores
Risk of silos or islands developing with boundaries drawn by commercial entities – community needs to push to keep them open, define boundaries if & how we want/need them
Re: surveying current development, PCC is convening a meeting of stakeholders (date not yet determined) that we might be able to leverage
General agreement to call the group Linked Open Data
EM sometimes got tripped up on assumptions about local workflow vs things happening in a shared space; cataloging workflows have been centered around tools – we haven’t discussed what it looks like to have intersection between LMS and shared data environment; cataloging tools embedded in LMS vs embedded in shared store
Advocating for and growing a community of practice around BF
Avoiding silos/islands – communicate w/Eluna, OCLC
Regular updates from BIG (Bibframe Operability Group) (Wayne, Kalli, Nancy are part)
would BF data reside in a data store in FOLIO (like MARC source data) flow into/integrate w/source MARC in FOLIO & update Instances?
in German libraries, no local bib store; detailed records are maintained externally
what is the purpose of storing something in FOLIO?
FOLIO community is truly international; N. American libs have a lot of assumptions about how we do things, German libraries have different model (and different assumptions) – this is an opportunity to consider what might work
LoC is planning to have a FOLIO BF data store
WOLFCon ideas?
Synergies between approaches
Overview, update, feedback
Half day linked data track w/presentations, panels, intro to bf
We need to step beyond introductions! take next step, active deep dive
Grounding conversation in actual bibliographic workflows, shared frame of reference