2019-09-26 Metadata Management Meeting notes

Owned by Christie Thomas
Last updated: Nov 20, 2019 by Laura E Daniels
2 min read

Date

Attendees

Goals

  • Prioritize post CAP MVP open inventory features

Discussion items

ItemWhoNotes - in 

Open Inventory Issues

Christie Thomas / Charlotte Whitt

Prioritize post CAP-MVP features for development (when CAP-MVP work is complete)

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1c2EygYIdOCcKIiKSJpRF8stmWy7JAl3m/edit#gid=1714726149

  • 45 post-cap mvp issues listed in doc above.
  • Group will prioritize list. Each member should list priorities (P1 (highest priority), P2, P3)
  • Jason (via chat) -"since reps from all of the libraries already ranked (and reranked) these issues, can we first sort these based on that ranking and then go thru the top to confirm that the SIG as-a-whole agrees?"
  • Goal - identify the top 5 to 10 features we think should be worked on post-mvp.
  • Response is needed by 9/27/2019
  • Sheet was ordered by library priority.
  • Felix (via chat) - "I'm a bit worried that some requirements could be really important to just a few libraries and could slip through. Example given all the Generators UXPROD-1854 /1770."
  • Criteria to think about while assigning P1, P2, P3
  • Please initial your "P1, P2, or P3" suggestion.
  • How do we measure something that is low priority for several institutions, but high priority for one? Maybe this exercise will help sort this out with these issues.


FOLIO Implementer's proposal for a panel on MARC and the catalogChristie Thomas / Charlotte Whitt

Proposal: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ozUSJT7hpTDJnk2_0NWPofR-tq0__HrOBXJ7b9VyNzk/edit

Recording of the FOLIO Implementers discussion: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ur9216_s29LGBTEd8L2NRf-ITDI_2O6U

(The discussion begins about 5 minutes in.)

Jacquie - Do we need a separate storage for MARC holdings - apart from SRS? Can we have multiple types of MARC in Source Record Storage?

Christie - Maybe the prefix identifier would be enough information for FOLIO to store MARC Holdings.

Ann-Marie - If we need MARC Holdings storage, we'll have it, but the bigger question is, is there some movement for some libraries to not have MARC Holdings? 

Charlotte - This is intentionally optional - libraries should be able to choose whether or not they want to have MARC Holdings. Charlotte recommends listening to the recording above to get the context of the issue.

Tiziana - Is confused as to why this is on the agenda, thinking this issue has been settled - some libraries need MARC holdings, some don't.  Ann-Marie - This is true - the question is, will some libraries that are migrating to FOLIO want to take this as an opportunity to drop MARC Holdings?

Jason - Functional requirements for sharing MARC bibs is different from sharing MARC holdings. Jason would like this to be a practical discussion as to what use cases MARC Holdings is the only suitable option for (if any). Why must some libraries keep MFHDs? What do we all need to consider, especially those considering dropping MARC Holdings? What may be missed?


Container Records no longer?

Several members heard that FOLIO will no longer have a "Container Record" as a feature of Inventory. Charlotte had not heard of this. She will listen to the recording of the ERM meeting. The group expressed confusion as to whether or not this is true. 

Link to the Google drive with the ERM recordings: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17-AAS8JPMF77MIeRdDCqkIeD0ZO-WWP0

The recording of the meeting yesterday (9/25/2019) is in the top of the folder.

Action items