2021-12-16 Metadata Management Meeting notes

Date

Dec 16, 2021

Attendees

please put an 'x' next to your name in the list below the "Discussion items" if you are attending. Thanks!

Recordings

Recordings of meetings can be found in the Metadata_Management_SIG > Recordings folder on Google Drive: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B7G8S7WF6N20YUM4My1oRTIxSHM

Discussion items

Notetaker?		@Charlotte Whitt and @Jacquie Samples
Announcements		MM SIG is cancelled December 23rd and 30th. @Marcia Borensztajn has reached out to @Laura E Daniels and they talked about the continued work on updating the documentation on Inventory and quickMARC. Laura has agreed to join the Documentation Working Group. The current version of docs.folio.org is documenting Honeysuckle. But in the beginning of the year, then the Documentation WG expects to start documenting Iris. There will be a drop down menu where the users can select what release version they want to see information for. Felix also mentioned the need for the documentation to be translated into other languages.
PC update		2021-12-16 Product Council Meeting notes
Release Notes/Changes	@Jennifer Eustis	MM SIG Release Note & Other Highlights @Jennifer Eustis har decided to do the release notes as a separat page. The dates in the document refers to the MM-SIG meeting where the given information was reviewed/talked about. The format of this page is still being refined. This week's highlight: Open
Sinopia/FOLIO integration update	@Michelle Futornick  @jpnelson	Slides: https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1uqfdVvkdDJU37V2Ka8tp9wLSH2PO3_y76Nh5_4kpLkU/edit @Michelle Futornick presenting the overview diagram for the Sinopia interaction with FOLIO, Inventory Open https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1uqfdVvkdDJU37V2Ka8tp9wLSH2PO3_y76Nh5_4kpLkU/edit The Sinopia record is the source of truth record. The MARC layer is skipped, which reduces the risk of losing data in the transformation from BibFrame to the FOLIO format (Instance). Jenn Colt asked about the use of Instance HRID. Jeremy explained the thinking behind the current use. Christie Thomas and Jacquie Samples agreed, indicating that these URIs should be mapped as another identifier type instead.  Leaving these data as HRID will make it difficult to integrate with other systems that expect FOLIO conventions for the HRID. Jeremy Nelson did a demo of the Sinopia tool (stage.sinopia.io/dashboard) Open Sinopia is open to any users. The middleware to integrate Sinopia with an ILS is being used by Stanford (for Symphony) and University of Pennsylvania is experimenting with an Alma integration. For the proof-of-concept integration with FOLIO (Sinolio), the users are Stanford and Cornell. The integration is designed so that other institutions could set up something similar. Demo of a specific search for "Jade war". And click on the button Export to Catalog: Open Extracting RDF from Sinopia, and loading into FOLIO Instance format. Open Open Detailed log feed back: Open (Insert description of the work flow for edit of records) Jeremy confirmed that the FOLIO specific information like statistical codes, tags, suppress from discovery, staff suppress, etc., is information that could be sent back to Sinopia as part of the administrative metadata package, but is not being sent back currently. The use of Instance HRID was debated in the Zoom chat. A solution could be to add a Sinopia Identifier type in Settings > Inventory > Instance > Identifier type. @Felix Hemme explained the way the German libraries use the module Inventory Update, which supports the upsert mechanism.
Browse searching support Call number Subject	@Khalilah Gambrell	Open https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/download/attachments/4664632/call_subject_browse.pptx?api=v2 Eminent need to support do browse search of Call number and Subject. The Falcon team who works on the back end work for mod-search (Elasticsearch) has also done some initial work which will support browse search. Cornell has raised an enhancement request for the effective shelving order to be added to holdings records also. Following JIRA tickets has been filed:  Back-end work: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/MODINVSTOR-274 Front-end work: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UIIN-415 The browse screens do not have sort able column heading. @Khalilah Gambrell will talk with the UX designer to have this indicated more clear.  @Charlotte Whitt pointed out that these screen using the Multi Column List (MCL) is an intermediary solution while waiting for the Hierarchical display of the result list display - which eventually will help out with the Call number PR having 33 results.  When doing Subject browse, then the result screen should not display the resource title or the publication date. Insert comments from Raegan, Tim, Lloyd ... @Raegan Wiechert asked where the Subject were pulled from. Khalilah and Charlotte will verify the mapping rules folio-org/mod-source-record-manager @Jacquie Samples said she was happy to see that the browse search function was going to happen for Lotus. @Khalilah Gambrell encouraged people to send e.g. feed back on use cases for Call number browse search and Subject browse search, and any feed back was welcome.  Open

Chat

Felix Hemme (ZBW) to Everyone (5:30 PM)
Meeting notes: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/x/OC1H
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (5:31 PM)
Thanks for the link, Felix!
I doing attendance and will help Charlotte if I can.
Me to Everyone (5:34 PM)
Thank you so much Jacquie :-)
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (5:34 PM)
😀
Felix Hemme (ZBW) to Everyone (5:34 PM)
Thanks Jacquie
Michelle Futornick to Everyone (5:36 PM)
https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1uqfdVvkdDJU37V2Ka8tp9wLSH2PO3_y76Nh5_4kpLkU/edit
Jenn Colt to Everyone (5:38 PM)
Why put the uri in the grid?
hrid
Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone (5:39 PM)
With an instance where there is an underlying marc srs file, there are fields in that instance that can't be edited via FOLIO Inventory edit instance. Will this be similar for sinopia records where the FOLIO instance fields won't be edited?
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (5:40 PM)
The URIs are not exactly human readable, though.
Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone (5:40 PM)
+1 Laura
Jenn Colt to Everyone (5:40 PM)
It seems like another instance field would be a better place and let FOLIO continue to govern hrids within
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (5:40 PM)
+1 Laura
I agree Jenn.
Laura Daniels to Everyone (5:41 PM)
+1 Jenn
Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone (5:43 PM)
Another question - for FOLIO specific information like statistical codes, tags, suppress from discovery, staff suppress, etc., will this information be sent back to sinopia as part of the administrative metadata package?
Christie Thomas (she/her) to Everyone (5:44 PM)
I agree regarding the hrid. It will make it difficult to integrate with other systems that expect FOLIO conventions for creating the HRID.
Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone (5:45 PM)
I also agree about the instance hrid. It would be better to have a specific identifier type for this sinopia url
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (5:47 PM)
Yes, Christie and Jenn.  It seems to me that instance hrid should follow FOLIO conventions, not necessarily Ebsco's.  This seems much more like another identifier type to add to the list of identifier types instead.
Christie Thomas (she/her) to Everyone (5:52 PM)
I think using an identifier type to gather this external identifier is a good idea.
Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone (5:52 PM)
Having that identifier type would also make reporting on those sinopia resources in FOLIO easier
or even to search them would be easier
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (5:53 PM)
Good points!
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (6:07 PM)
We would still be able to get back to Sinopia easily by copying the URI from the new Identifier Type
I would prefer that the URI not be in the HRID field, though.
Jenn Colt to Everyone (6:08 PM)
Maybe this goes back to the first diagram - how much of this is in a folio module? Any or is it all API?
This seems like a good lighter weight place to start rather than a module. Thanks!
Tim Watters to Everyone (6:20 PM)
Would it be difficult to add the current Snapshot release?
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (6:20 PM)
Jenn, can you talk about what the dates in the headers refer to
I ask because I saw the new edits coming through all week. Thanks!
Me to Everyone (6:30 PM)
The work we did on UXPROD-2002
Raegan Wiechert to Everyone (6:31 PM)
What about things that do not have an item record, but only a holdings record?
Laura Daniels to Everyone (6:31 PM)
Cornell has an enhancement request in for the effective shelving order to be added to holdings records also; I'll look for it in JIRA
https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/MODINVSTOR-274
Me to Everyone (6:34 PM)
That’s the back end work (above), and the front end work is UIIN-415
Lucas Mak to Everyone (6:34 PM)
if the effective call number includes a prefix (e.g. folio for oversize), will the browse ignore the prefix?
thanks
Tim Watters to Everyone (6:35 PM)
Will the different call number schemes sort together?
Joshua Barton to Everyone (6:36 PM)
What will it show when there is no match with the search? e.g. if there was no "PR" in the catalog in this search example?
Nice. Thanks.
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (6:41 PM)
Sorry my internet is bad again, so I may have missed where the call number is being pulled from.
Jessica Janecki to Everyone (6:43 PM)
Exactly Jacquie!
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (6:45 PM)
Thanks Khalilah!

Lynne Fors to Everyone (6:47 PM)
Would the browse search allow for us to select which classification scheme of call number within our collections?  My library has both Dewey and LC classifications in use and we would want to be able to browse each classification scheme.
Jessica Janecki to Everyone (6:48 PM)
THey do overlap.
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (6:48 PM)
I think that there could be confusion between Dewey classification and accession numbers, too.
Jessica Janecki to Everyone (6:48 PM)
And if you have accession numbers they can overlap.
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (6:48 PM)
Thanks Lynne, didn't mean to repeat your excellent point.  :)
Lynne Fors to Everyone (6:49 PM)
You were talking, and I was typing.  As along as we get it out there!  :)

Tim Watters to Everyone (6:51 PM)
Why is the year column included?
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (6:52 PM)
I think that the year is not valuable in this browse.
Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone (6:52 PM)
For the subject search, are these from the instance or can you search different types like LC, FAST?
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (6:52 PM)
I agree with Laura about the title.
Raegan Wiechert to Everyone (6:52 PM)
+1 to Laura
Jennifer Eustis (she/her) to Everyone (6:52 PM)
The date doesn't seem necessary
Catherine Smith (she/her/hers) to Everyone (6:53 PM)
+1 for Laura's point
Tim Watters to Everyone (6:53 PM)
+1 Laura
Felix Hemme (ZBW) to Everyone (6:53 PM)
+1 to Laura
Natalie Sommerville to Everyone (6:53 PM)
+1 Laura and Jacquie.   I would prefer only the subject string and the number of entries with that subject to appear.
Lynne Fors to Everyone (6:54 PM)
+1 to Natalie, Laura, and Jacquie
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (6:55 PM)
And, in when there is a chronological subdivision, it wouldn't look good, either.
Me to Everyone (6:55 PM)
issues.folio.org/browse/MSEARCH-60
Janet Ewing (she/her) to Everyone (6:55 PM)
+1 to folks above...  In both cases (title or year) it is pretty rare that there is only 1 title for a given subject and so it is more often confusing than it is likely to ever be helpful.
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (6:55 PM)
And, can we browse Form/Genre separately?
Jessica Janecki to Everyone (6:55 PM)
@jacquie, not if it is coming from the instance :(
Me to Everyone (6:55 PM)
We don’t have Form/Genre at this point
Jacquie Samples to Everyone (6:56 PM)
Oh, Bummer!  I forgot about that, obviously.

Regular Attendees

(alphabetical by first name)