2024-06-20 Metadata Management Meeting notes

Owned by Felix Hemme
Last updated: Jun 20, 2024 by Alissa Hafele
8 min read

Meeting time: 11:30 AM ET, 05:30 PM CET, 04:30 PM GMT

Meeting URL: Join our Cloud HD Video Meeting . The meeting password can be found here.

 Date

Jun 20, 2024

Note taker

Laura Daniels, Lynne Fors, Alissa Hafele, Natascha Owens

Recordings

Recordings of meetings can be found in the Metadata_Management_SIG > Recordings folder on AWS from 2022 onwards: https://recordings.openlibraryfoundation.org/folio/metadata-management-sig/

Discussion items

Item

Presenter

Notes

Item

Presenter

Notes

Announcements



No meeting June 27 and July 4!

Update of holdings also sets the updated date in attached items

@Khalilah Gambrell

20 Jun 2024 Update - Team is reviewing an issue that Julian has created https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/MODINVSTOR-1220

Notes from discussion:

Khalilah reviewed feedback and change was made in Poppy to increase consistency but there are some institutions that are having workflow problems as a result. Julian created story to reflect this new feedback MODINVSTOR-1220 Team will review and estimate time needed. Does this story meet expectations?

  • The item date can change when the holdings is updated, but should be reflected that the System made this change and not a user. +1s

    • What user would it be?

  • When should an item get updated?

    • Item records should only get new version number/date update when certain holdings changes are made that the item inherits. Sarah reports that adding link to the holdings record triggers an item update. This should be considered a bug.

    • When you change a system maintained field, e.g. a check-in, it is confusing that the metadata now reflects a user has made a change to the record.

    • Item updated date becomes irrelevant if it is changed every time a holdings is touched.

      • Using item updated dates to e.g. filter is common and across apps, e.g. receiving

  • Are there any patterns in FOLIO where the system makes a change and it is clearly reflected?

    • SRS change not reflected in instance? No, instance date still changes because map attempt was made. This feels like another problem.

Can address the system user issue (short term), but the last updated date issue is much broader. How is this defined and is it different across institutions? Longer term (Sunflower) it would be good to look at this more, what do users want to track/not track? How does it relate to the change tracker?

Action: Christie suggests this SIG collect use cases around changes, e.g. implied vs direct.

Please see chat transcript below for more on this.

Change Tracker

  • Can view changes from app, e.g. in quickMARC and includes user (can be anonymized), what changes made, date, what app triggered the change.

    • should subfield also be included in change list? e.g. what level of change should be listed?

    • replace full records often - how will this be reflected in the change log?

  • Summary: alot more discussion needed around all of this

Sorting of protected fields

 @Ryan Taylor

https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/MODDICORE-358

 

 

 

PC updates

@Charlotte Whitt

2024-06-20 Product Council Meeting Notes

Announcements:

  • Reminder to folks about voting for the CC, TC and PC.

  • No PC meeting on 6/27/2024 and 7/4/2024. The PC meeting on 7/18/2024 is to be Asian Passific Friendly meeting. Time to be decided later.

  • WOLFcon updates: the Sched program will be sent out next week. A few notifications is to be send out 6/21/2024. Pretty much all sessions were approved. A few conflicts to be resolved. Separate registrations for both workshop (9/23/2024) and the conference. Both are now open, and registrations are trickling in. This year there is a fee for attending virtually 50.00 USD to pay for equipment.

  • SIG report - the link is here.

  • The new PC WG on Better Sample Data in FOLIO Snapshot will have their first meeting on 6/25/2024.

SIG Discussion: Conversation with SIG on PC action items from Things that could be better about FOLIO survey.

Four topics which require the PC’s focus:

  1. Search - improvements to inventory search, both basic and advanced, and cross app search

  2. Courses - no PO for four years, no funding, some requirements work underway by Implementer’s SIG: 2024-01-30 FOLIO Implementers Meeting Notes and review to happen in August at Cornell

    1. Labeled Jira tickets for Courses

  3. Data import - less about new functionality and more about performance, stability, reliability

  4. Reporting - options for reporting are distributed and inconsistently available to different FOLIO libraries - how can we come up with a general reporting strategy to ensure all libraries have options available?

BELA (Bulk Edit and Lists App)

Jennifer Eustis

No meeting this week.

Data Import Working Group

Jennifer Eustis

No meeting this week.

quickMARC Subgroup update

Raegan Wiechert

All meetings for June and July have been cancelled

Chat

08:31:43 From Lynne Fors to Everyone:
2024-06-20 Metadata Management Meeting notes
08:35:06 From Linda Turney to Everyone:
not seeing screen
08:35:07 From Lynne Fors to Everyone:
MODINVSTOR-1220: Holding update should only update items where neededDraft
08:35:15 From Ryan Tamares - Stanford Law Library to Everyone:
Reacted to "not seeing screen" with ➕
08:35:23 From Bob Scheier (Holy Cross) to Everyone:
Reacted to "not seeing screen" with ➕
08:38:00 From Sara Colglazier to Everyone:
+1 to Laura's point!
08:38:09 From Ryan Tamares - Stanford Law Library to Everyone:
Reacted to "+1 to Laura's point!" with ➕
08:38:09 From Bob Scheier (Holy Cross) to Everyone:
Reacted to "+1 to Laura's point!" with 👍
08:38:14 From Lynne Fors to Everyone:
Reacted to "+1 to Laura's point!" with ➕
08:38:17 From Bob Scheier (Holy Cross) to Everyone:
Reacted to "+1 to Laura's point!" with ➕
08:38:18 From Bob Scheier (Holy Cross) to Everyone:
Removed a 👍 reaction from "+1 to Laura's point!"
08:38:59 From Chris Long to Everyone:
Reacted to "+1 to Laura's point!" with ➕
08:42:23 From Lynne Fors to Everyone:
A system process change versus a human initiated change should be transparently clear
08:42:30 From Khalilah (EBSCO) to Everyone:
Apologies for not being prepared but this is the story that we implemented in Poppy - MODINVSTOR-1053: Item metadata not updated when call number changes via the holdings recordClosed
08:42:31 From Christie Thomas (she/her) to Everyone:
Reacted to "Apologies for not be..." with 💯
08:42:34 From Christie Thomas (she/her) to Everyone:
Removed a 💯 reaction from "Apologies for not be..."
08:43:07 From Christie Thomas (she/her) to Everyone:
Reacted to "A system process cha..." with 💯
08:43:54 From Laura Daniels to Everyone:
Reacted to "A system process cha..." with 💯
08:44:59 From Laura Daniels to Everyone:
that's an excellent comparison, Christie
08:46:33 From Index Data to Everyone:
+ 1 Sara. Change tracker in Inventory would be really nice
08:46:41 From Khalilah (EBSCO) to Everyone:
Here is a rough mockup of what Sara means Version history - Google Drive
08:48:27 From Index Data to Everyone:
This cascading of updates from holdings to item - that’s a new behavior right? Not sure if it was introduced as of Orchid, or Poppy?
08:48:39 From Gerhard, Jeffery to Everyone:
With older ILS systems using relational databases, it was easier to maintain update dates for particular tables. Status updates would be in a separate table from 'metadata' updates
08:50:16 From Lynne Fors to Everyone:
Like an unmapped 9xx field?
08:51:53 From Laura Daniels to Everyone:
I think it's a broader conversation
08:52:01 From Christie Thomas (she/her) to Everyone:
Reacted to "I think it's a broad..." with ➕
08:52:02 From Index Data to Everyone:
I thought this was triggered by Kafka messaging
08:52:05 From Lynne Fors to Everyone:
Reacted to "I think it's a broad..." with ➕
08:52:05 From Index Data to Everyone:
Reacted to "I think it's a broad..." with ➕
08:52:11 From Lisa Furubotten TA&M to Everyone:
Just asking: was the Instance not updated; or was it updated and just didn't look different because what what change in MARC doesn't show in the Instance?
08:53:01 From Christie Thomas (she/her) to Everyone:
Replying to "Just asking: was th..."

I think that is the use case just described. The changed MARC data is outside of what was mapped to the instance. But the instance was still updated from the new version of the marc record.

08:53:04 From Index Data to Everyone:
Replying to "Just asking: was th..."

The instance was not updated. The change was only in a MARC tag not represented in the Instance

08:53:11 From Lynne Fors to Everyone:
Does receiving an item have any impact on item records? We don't have ours connected
08:53:37 From Laura Daniels to Everyone:
Reacted to "Does receiving an it..." with 👆
08:54:02 From Christie Thomas (she/her) to Everyone:
Replying to "Just asking: was th..."

Right, nothing changed in the instance, but the instance was updated - the updated date and updated by information changes.

08:54:14 From Lisa Furubotten TA&M to Everyone:
Replying to "Just asking: was th..."

08:55:18 From Lynne Fors to Everyone:
Replying to "Does receiving an it..."

08:56:38 From Laura Daniels to Everyone:
Replying to "Just asking: was th..."

08:57:31 From Laura Daniels to Everyone:
if we had some sort of change log, it would solve a lot of my concerns
08:58:02 From Sara Colglazier to Everyone:
Would it be possible to be even more specific than just FOLIO system, to FOLIO App X?
08:58:21 From Laura Daniels to Everyone:
but also, if nothing has changed (e.g. the Instance/MARC example), the record should not be considered updated. to me updated means something changed.
09:00:09 From Index Data to Everyone:
Maybe test in one of the older flower release environments, before this new change pattern was introduced
09:02:15 From Lynne Fors to Everyone:
I would like to see any status changes from check-out/in to be tracked in the date only associated with the status of the item and not the full item record.
09:02:19 From Laura Daniels to Everyone:
You're doing a great job managing this conversation, Christie
09:02:36 From Ryan Tamares - Stanford Law Library to Everyone:
Reacted to "if we had some sort ..." with ➕
09:04:00 From Index Data to Everyone:
Reacted to "You're doing a great..." with 💯
09:04:05 From Chris Long to Everyone:
Reacted to "if we had some sort ..." with ➕
09:04:05 From Lynne Fors to Everyone:
Reacted to "You're doing a great..." with 💯
09:04:21 From Corrie Hutchinson to Everyone:
Reacted to "You're doing a great..." with 💯
09:04:46 From Khalilah (EBSCO) to Everyone:
Reacted to "You're doing a great..." with 💯
09:06:59 From Bob Scheier (Holy Cross) to Everyone:
Reacted to "You're doing a great..." with 💯
09:07:17 From Lynne Fors to Everyone:
I would find it more helpful to have the "via [app]" on the same line as Changed in bold.
09:08:00 From Lynne Fors to Everyone:
Replying to "I would find it more..."

09:08:46 From Khalilah (EBSCO) to Everyone:
Reacted to "I would find it more..." with 👍
09:09:14 From Khalilah (EBSCO) to Everyone:
Reacted to "or the specific fiel..." with 👍
09:12:05 From Lynne Fors to Everyone:
The answer is it depends on what happened
09:12:35 From Laura Daniels to Everyone:
I personally prefer less granularity, as it (tracking changes) seems too complicated otherwise.
09:12:58 From Laura Daniels to Everyone:
and I agree with Sara, that knowing "who" or "what" made the change is important
09:14:11 From Ryan Tamares - Stanford Law Library to Everyone:
Replying to "and I agree with Sar..."

09:15:27 From Laura Daniels to Everyone:
OK, thank you -- I'll get this onto the AI agenda
09:18:17 From Khalilah (EBSCO) to Everyone:
Reacted to "OK, thank you -- I'l..." with 👍