Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata




  1. Scope of work
    1. Updating vision document to address work since it was written
      1. Question: Entity management as separate domain of functionality within FOLIO. Work in FOLIO has worked around the edges of this: MARC authority within MARC space; Sinolio to pull graph into database. Does entity management continue to entail a separate domain?
      2. Question: have orgs app and contacts associated with orgs; there is not curation of authority / entity management related to those orgs/contacts. Have discussed doing something to organize that better.
      3. Entity management is a broad area. Is it a lone app completely separate? Or is it an app that takes some of the work and other bits of the work happen in other apps?
    2. Environmental scan that includes the goals of what each component are trying to achieve
    3. Road map that identifies various trajectories that entity management could take since there are multiple trajectories here in a way that there was not two-years ago.
    4. Development principles to understand how various development initiatives are going to impact the project (and each other)
    5. Important to focus on how to model Linked Data in FOLIO... to leverage linked open data, cannot be bound to a single LSP. What is the collaborative environment and how can the tools that we can integrate into FOLIO contribute. Challenge is that we do not know what that infrastructure looks like... what are the sources? How do we get FOLIO plugged in?
    6. Are we linked data at-large? Or are we entity management only? Where is the scope of our work; does that include all of the integration work?
      1. Want to make sure that we are aware of the broader but interest is how we manage entities in FOLIO once the integrations with external data are solved / available. Don't want to recreate a source of truth but not take on the source of truthness that others have in their wheelhouses.
      2. interesting to think about larger connections to linked data world and how entities can be managed elsewhere...
      3. linked data is a means to several ends and it is not the only story. If we narrow entity management to only linked data... 
      4. We are not only in linked data environment and need to work with all of the international standards
      5. Original vision includes the aggregation of multiple sources, internal and external; this is a good model for starting to think about how we want to manage entities. Want ability to use external entities when appropriate and the ability to be a source of entities, as well. This is completely within scope and necessary to have flexible environment. Inventory does this abstraction, as well – this is itself a core development idea in FOLIO
  2. Outputs
    1. In PO mode: what needed as actionable output - actionable stories that are related to features that represent some type of functionality we want in FOLIO. Clear requirements and meet use cases defined by SMEs that can be measured and tested
      1. Include prioritization from this group on use cases
    2. Alignment with team EBSCO and LC are convening to develop the features in FOLIO to support LC since this is where funding is right now; important to understand the trajectory of this development to better understand where we can engage / contribute; can also aid in understanding where local resources from other libraries can fill gaps and/or NOT duplicate effort
      1. 4 development teams will be working on this; no road map can be shared yet. Working with LC to plan now. Accelerated timeline
      2. LC's requirements were very clear – can map to our document of use cases: 
      3. Even before LC, EBSCO was working toward some of this work for FOLIO because were being asked by clients in Chlie, Australia, etc.
    3. Environmental scan and road map – critical outputs that may converge on discussion with EBSCO and LC
    4. User acceptance testing and being involved in the bugfests
  3. Process
    1. How do we ensure that the development aligns with the group's efforts? There is eagerness to work together since all of the development will aid this group
    2. Task lists for helping us prepare to provide feedback in timely way given accelerated timeline being introduced? Can change priorities of the group...
    3. Pick a couple of places and jump in?
    4. ERM was a similar effort when GBV funded it.
    5. ERM had homework; LC had done a lot of preliminary work. If there are on-going meetings, make sure there are ways to keep them open
    6. It is early days for LC and EBSCO... need to have kick-off meeting and develop a plan before LC can communicate with this group. Need patience as they figure out what they are doing.
    7. LC's primary responsibility is to migrate records and staff to FOLIO... excited to join community but primary need is to get FOLIO implemented. Want to do this mindfully and be a respected member of the community
    8. Gloria is the product owner of entity management based on LC's requirements
    9. Divide work in parallel
      1. #1: look at the LC RFP use cases and identify alignment and differences
    10. Is Zephiera the starting point in the work thinking about doing? As zepheira has been with EBSCO, have built reusable graph storage that could be reused; MARC to BF pipeline that'll be contributed. No specific details yet. This is data graph architecture
  4. Frequency of meeting
  5. Communication channels
  6. What does it mean to be a member of this group
  • No labels