2023-04-26 Data Import Subgroup meeting

Recordings are posted Here (2022+) and Here (pre-2022) Slack channel for Q&A, discussion between meetings

Requirements details Here Additional discussion topics in Subgroup parking lot

Attendees: Ann-Marie Breaux (Deactivated) Jennifer Eustis Taylor Smith Kim Wiljanen leeda.adkins@duke.edu Jenn Colt Lucas Mak Colin Van Alstine Monica Arnold Lisa Smith Lynne Fors Raegan Wiechert Heather MacFarlane (Deactivated) Christie Thomas

Agenda:

Announcements
- 3 more development sprints for Poppy
- Misc topic: do we need to refine checkbox field mappings on instance, holdings, item field mapping profiles like we have on orders?
  - Would it be UI only or BE also? How much effort? A-M will make a list of the checkbox fields and get add'l background from the devs; then discuss at next meeting
- Reviewing Poppy bugs and misc; goal is not to let Poppy bugs spill to Quesnalia
- Still working on analyzing the Prokopovich backlog and splitting it between the various teams and POs picking up responsibilities; that will take a few more weeks; Folijet and Spitfire are sharing responsibility for Inventory, and have inherited a number of Inventory bugs
Multiple Holdings and Items
- If all the item info is defaults (no barcode or copy number), only the permanent location code to indicate x items belong to that particular holdings, how do we indicate that? Per Kate, we should be able to figure it out, since we create holdings before items, so we could read x 945s and recognize how many items they relate to
- Would there be situations where 1 9xx has a barcode in it, but 1 doesn't? Or copy number? Or can Import always expect consistent data?
  - Mostly consistent, but might vary if enumeration/chronology for one, but not for another; Christie will send an example
  - Also would have situations where the match profile limits to 1 holdings, and then create or update a whole bunch of items on that 1 holdings
  - Lynne: would have cases where one has barcodes and one doesn't, e.g. 1 copy for archives, 1 for circulating; Lynne will send an example
  - Jennifer: number of pieces would vary a lot; notes for circulating/special collection/staff only notes; Jennifer will send a music example
  - Autumn: use 948 for holdings and 949 for items; could they add an indicator for which holdings in a subfield of the 949; Autumn will send an example
  - Jennifer: electronic materials - multi-volume eBooks may have multiple URLs (one for each volume); and then would have to multiply by 5 since they need one for each location and each volume for each college/proxy prefix/location; Jennifer will send an example
- For new orders, if total quantity is a, and location x gets b copies and location y gets c copies, can vendor provide total quantity, plus details for items in in individual, repeating 9xxs? Yes - add my other notes
  - 4 copies
    - 3 circulating
    - 1 archives
    - 941$a4 if creating orders, there will be a MARC 9xx that has the total quantity ordered; that should not be a problem
      - 945$hKU/CC/DI/M
      - 945$hKU/CC/DI/M
      - 945$hKU/CC/DI/M
      - 945$hKU/CC/DI/A
      - This set of 945s means create 3 item records for M, and 1 for A
    - Is it OK if this is a format we cannot support? A-M to ask GOBI about EOCRs; should not be a problem since you can only specify 1 location per GOBI order, so main and archives would have to be 2 separate orders
      - 945$hKU/CC/DI/M$q3 interpret to create 3 item records for M, 1 for A (not something that devs are currently building)
      - 945$hKU/CC/DI/A$q1
- We're working on the create logic now; then update; then mixed create and update (maybe) - need to get something out for UAT ASAP
- If only creating holdings, that's fine - no items needed; but if creating an item for 1 holdings 9xx in the MARC Bib, we have to create an item for all holdings 9xxs in the MARC Bib
  - Might want holdings and items for main, but only holdings for archives
  - How to do it? How structure the job and matches and field mappings?
    - Create holdings and items for both and then delete the items for archives (ugh)
    - Create holdings in 1st job, then second job to match on main holdings and create items for it only
- If we're using a default permanent location in the holdings record field mapping, then we cannot create multiple separate holdings
  - Matches the logic for incoming data, so this is OK
- Review holdings and item fields: any that would not be mapped from an incoming MARC Bib?
  - Not needed per Roman, so we skipped this
Log updates
- HOMEWORK: Review UI stories in UXPROD-4079 - Getting issue details... STATUS , especially the attached mockups. Any questions?
Maybe look at Jennifer's example if time

Upcoming meetings/agenda topics:

No meeting 10 May (A-M on vacation)
Misc
- Discuss/review mockups for MARC updates refinements
- POL/VRN matching
  - For invoices, we only consider open POs
  - For Instance, Holdings, Items, we currently (Orchid and before) only consider open POs. Should we change the Inventory matching logic to allow matching on closed POs as well?
  - MODDATAIMP-769 - Getting issue details... STATUS
- Deleting outdated versions of SRS records
  - Can we define a cutoff date? 90 days ago? 1 year ago?
    - Different for records that are used during import and then not consulted again? (e.g. EDIFACT invoices, MARC bibs that only create/update orders, holdings, items)
  - Effects on the import log
- Data import and consortia (cross-tenant importing)
- OCLC number cleanup
  - Confirm 035 structure, aim for it to be consistent across all FOLIO tenants
- Downloading log info
  - Lots of interest, especially for errors
  - Including identifiers for everything
  - What would UI look like?
  - What would output look like?
- Variation between PTF and production library performance results - why?
- Revisit use cases for Updating individual MARC fields - what are the most common use cases?

Chat