2017-08-31 Metadata Management Meeting Notes

There will be a forum on GOKb, on September 13. Joseph will send out a sign up form.

• PC discussed the results of a recent survey on resource management functional priorities for V1 development. It included questions around necessary functions for migration/implementation. The survey was sent to the RM SIG and PC members and allowed for one response per institution. Survey results will be posted to the RM SIG space in the next week or so. Possibility of future surveys that target functional prioritization for Metadata Management.
  
  
• PC also trying to coordinate and encourage FOLIO presentation proposals at upcoming conferences including ER&L, SXSW, and Charleston. Participants from the PC as well as RM and RA SIGS have submitted proposals. MM should consider possible proposals for upcoming conferences (e.g. ALA, Computers in Libraries)
  
  Thank you for sending this to me Dracine!

Codex metadata

Update

Kathryn presented the Inventory Metadata Elements set that she created on the wiki. Kathryn is focusing on what the data is that we need for the inventory portion of our records. What fields and subfields will need to be displayed as we work with inventory records? What kinds of data will we need to see in different contexts, such as Acquisitions vs. Circulation? The intent of the Inventory Metadata Elements is to define terms so we are all thinking in the same way. As much as possible the Codex element names were paralleled.

Classification will be included in the Bib Level Elements.

Flags on inventory record will be set through the user interface. The relationship between a flag set in the inventory and a flag at the Codex level is still being considered. They are not necessary equivalent.

Kathryn will start a discuss thread for each the bib,holding,item levels to discuss these details.

2. Conversation about multi-entity items -- e.g., analyzed titles and boundwiths.  How does/can the Codex model to support them?  Some feedback from the SIG would be useful.

3. Discuss non-bibliographic and non-MARC resources to make sure that the fields we've selected based on bibliographic/MARC content are sufficient to address other needs. Perhaps use the SIG time to identify a small group of experts to meet with Kathryn for an hour or so at a later time to provide input/feedback.

4. Discuss/review resource types -- where they should be pulled from, how they relate to circulation, etc. 

Filip discussed what would display at the Item level. The first version: MarcEdit for editing, FOLIO is able to search and display the records and handle system-wide edits such as adding notes. Batch importing is beingconsidered envisioned.

Options:

1) Whenever you pull in a file, the system could recognize that it is a MARC file

2) There could be a specific batch import area of FOLIO. In this scenario there could be templates guided by rules based on the source of the record. The way that it maps the fields would be determined by the source of the records.

Filip is asking for feedback.

When a record is imported, they go into the source record. The inventory space has to convert the data to a useable format for that purpose. Vince confirmed that the source record would be the edited version

1. Figure out if it exists in system already
2. If it exists it chooses how to behave (override, merge, not override)

Vince - A load is taking a MARC record, bringing it in. With that MARC record, FOLIO will create an instance (i.e. and internal ID). The merge problem needs to be solved by a set of rules. That is where the mapping comes in.

Anne-Marie - MARC records are used to build and order, or to build an item.

Vince - This is a seperate issue to be dealt with in the acquisition space. The MARC record is a conflation of multiple jobs/purposes.

Christie - Updated and merging is very complicated. The holdings and items need logic as well, that will be dependent on the incoming bibliographic record.

Vince - The ability to create a template that will help interpret the values