Attendees: Jason Kovari, Gloria Gonzalez, Sheila Torres-Blank, Andreas Mace, Ann-Marie Breaux, Christie Thomas, Jacquie Samples, Jenn Colt, Laura Daniels, Lisa McColl, Lisa Robinson, Mary Campany, Rita Albrecht, Sebastian Hammer, Steven Folsom, Nate Trail, Wayne Schneider, Nancy Lorimer, Craig Rosenbeck

Agenda:

Updates to agenda?
1. Khalilah will speak at an upcoming meeting re: MARC authorities work
Overview of linked data functionality planned for FOLIO and LC's new Library Collections Access Platform (Gloria Gonzalez)
1. Background: outside of FOLIO is EBSCO Bibliograph service – MARC records transformed into BF resources and published on web. Intent: embed data on any website to link back to catalog + integrate with Google and other services; includes schema.org borrow action
  1. currently sending only MARC data to FOLIO but looking to add graph storage with new RDF import mechanism to connect to Inventory
  2. relationship between FOLIO and Bibliograph? Separate though both supported by EBSCO. Library Link Network infrastructure on which bibliograph is built... is being rebuilt for FOLIO and will be contributed as open source
2. Library Collections Access Platform (LCAP) - will be contributed to FOLIO's codebase
  1. Adapting MARVA to work with new graph storage
  2. Authority & Entity Management Functionality: EMWG will provide feedback on requirements for EM services created as part of LCAP
3. ETL: MARC and BF (and other prioritized formats) - alongside linking to entities (confirm)
4. EBSCO Data.Graph architecture extension will work in parallel with FOLIO SRS (confirm)
5. LC Profiles on GitHub - will be available and can be adapted locally
6. "Double cataloging" - in next 1-2 years, will need to continue to use both MARC and BF concurrently
7. Inventory - graph storage relationship: short term still needing MARC SRS but overtime this may change
8. MARVA as FOLIO app or external with integration points to FOLIO? Not yet decided... initially considered it a FOLIO app and have some feedback in both directions. Graph storage should be usable with multiple editors so downsides to decoupling.
9. Timeline: Current: creating roadmap, updating draft design based on initial feedback, learn from EMWG's environmental scan and use cases; Next steps: align with FOLIO release schedule and conduct LD requirement sessions at the Library.
10. Transform Rules
  1. filtering punctuation
  2. Can track rules and versions
  3. output graph is JSON - then stored in graph storage, which includes an internal data viewer
11. **LC's activity streams is being considered for monitoring changes
12. Use cases
  1. Knowledge workers at LC: as a cataloger, I need to describe a work; view changes in non-MARC thesauri and update local MARC/BF descriptions; search MARC tag or BF element regardless of resource format; search using non-Latin scripts
  2. Consumers of LC data: search and download auth records in MARC or BF; receive high-quality bib data in MARC and/or BF; view weekly reports of LCNAF and then apply to local MARC or BF descriptions
13. Summary
  1. Data.Graph Architecture (postgres with extension) - added to backend
  2. ETL pipeline (added to backend)
  3. Import and export RDF into FOLIO (part of backend)
  4. Supporting BF sharing between libraries and consortia
  5. Full support of LC cataloging distribution services
  6. Adapt MARVA editor
  7. Add new functionality to MARVA
14. What can EMWG do to help with this work beyond what we are already doing?
  1. Timing and where LC is at in process. Getting into user stories is next – getting input from EMWG but needs LC approval first. Once roadmap is ready, share with this group as well. Next on roadmap - RDF import mechanism
  2. Testing for releases – to help identify bugs and resolve issues
  3. Provide examples and follow through to understand what data exist, etc.
  4. Documentation! - links to PPTX, recordings, slides
  5. Gloria and Ann-Marie will huddle after meeting to discuss SRS, import, etc. vision
15. Questions
  1. eResources management and Entity Management
  2. ERM?
  3. When can we expect more information on the overall functionality / scalability of FOLIO?
  4. Export Apps being separate feels confusing... if multiple import apps, figure out how they fit together / make sense together
  5. New import mechanism - will that include MARC? ETL pipeline will be used for MARC from which LC wants to create entities; will also work with CSV. This is more about transformation and import not importing MARC
  6. How to query the RDF?
  7. Understanding this work's impact on the roadmap for other modules is important!
    1. roadmap for LC is separate from FOLIO roadmap to not pull resources/energy from FOLIO but they'll be aligned

Browser not supported