2024-07-11 Metadata Management Meeting notes
- Felix Hemme
- Jennifer Eustis
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
Jul 11, 2024 (NO MEETING!)
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 |
|---|---|---|
Announcements |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PC updates | @Charlotte Whitt | 2024-07-11 Product Council Agenda and Meeting Notes This week’s PC meeting focused on introducing new members to the work of the PC. We also talked about the pilot in Acquisitions that was put in place to prioritize development work. This is done through voting in Jira and a topic tracker wiki page. |
BELA (Bulk Edit and Lists App) | Jennifer Eustis | New functionality for instances was demoed. This can be seen in FOLIO snapshot. For ETL of instance/marc srs bulk edits, the proposed solution is to rely on Data Import. Concerns were raised about how the bulk edit jobs would be managed in the queue if slicing was enabled or not as well as performance issues. |
Data Import Working Group | Jennifer Eustis | 2024-7-10 Data Import Subgroup meeting We talked about several outstanding items from the topic tracker. Of note for this group is enhancing access to 856 subfields such as access, terms and non public note. The working group also raised the question of how to ensure that the appropriate pieces are updated in FOLIO when there are changes to our standards such as new MARC fields, new RDA terms, etc. |
quickMARC Subgroup update | Raegan Wiechert | All meetings for June and July have been cancelled |
Chat
08:31:43 From Lynne Fors to Everyone:
2024-07-11 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 https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17ghSSy1kvLOVGO8JzFyFJXfjbJHt8mo6
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 Instance08:53:11 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 👍