Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  • New request to join group
  • Next step for work areas
    • on hold. Wayne is planning to work on this today and tomorrow
  • For Authority Management (see: Authority Management - current practice)
    • Questions to address:
      • What from workflows should we continue?
      • Where are gaps in current workflows?
      • Should there be one workflow? Many workflows?
      • What from workflows is FOLIO-relevant / should be added to FOLIO JIRA?
      • What from workflows should remain external to FOLIO/ILS?
    • Where are gaps in current workflows?
    • So much is institutionally aligned based on staffing models, expectations of local effort versus outsourcing; etc..
      • Define guiding principles!
    • In broad strokes, there are only a few different methods of authority control
      • data within tool (manage auth records) OR outside tool to update bib records (no manage auth records)
      • do we use ILS to update bib data? Or do bib records get replaced via outside effort?
    • SHARE-VDE experiences. complex areas of activity
      • attempting to create bridge between traditional and future scenario
      • use case document: split different areas (traditional versus future) 
        • how to provide authority control services for MARC
        • how to manage future authority approach in entity-based model
      • need to be many workflows to facilitate various scenarios
      • authorities subgroup joined a subgroup working on S-VDE entity editor for clustered db
        • work with data within the editor and with external sources
        • how to manage wikidata data in local editor 
        • APIs - what is needed to facilitate all of this
      • defining SHARE-VDE data model that can accommodate LRM and BIBFRAME; differs from Sinopia in that Sinopia works with entities using any kind of data model. What would be approach of FOLIO? Something specific for FOLIO ? ACTION: add this to a future meeting agenda
    • Complex when thinking about entities... not just two types of nodes going between themselves but there are any number of connections needing to be maintained
    • How does this interact with discovery wrt: data stored in FOLIO? Gaps question with discovery in terms of how much/little auth data we are using for discovery
    • For digital collections: ability to publish vocabularies as LOD. In inventory, have reference data that is published as LOD elsewhere (e.g.: RDA data, etc.). UUIDs in FOLIO that go across all institutions; when implementation happens locally for things like content type – mint a local UUID. need to look beyond managing vocabularies internal to FOLIO and those that are managed externally and just consumed
    • Generic functions/utilities that are universal:
      1. Need to store authority/entity data somewhere in FOLIO. needs will change based on push-to-discovery OR re-use across FOLIO... still need a place to store those data. Important for adoption
      2. Manage external URIs in relation to UUIDs (only if needed) universally across FOLIO instances; pref: use source URIs
      3. Reporting (automated) across bib data; consider how the Reporting SIG can engage with this OR is this ad-hoc. 
      4. CRUD functions
        1. if we have entity management APP: what are the requirements? Do we need a diff app for each entity type? Do we have ability to define own entities for various projects (at implementation-level); how do we manage data models across the various external datasets / is there an internal data model to which we need to map (like SHARE-VDE)?
      5. ability to determine what/how to index and display different types of entities


Action Items:

  • Tiziana will present documentation on the SAHRE-VDE use cases during next meeting
  • Jason: add to outputs: list of detailed reporting functions for future MM-SIG/Reporting SIG engagement
  • For future meeting: what is the approach in FOLIO wrt: data modeling


High-level items raised from 4/8 overview of current authority control practice: 

  • Authority management workflows (current): Authority Management - current practice
  • workflows:
    • authority service (weekly with MARCive for Duke) versus local effort
    • new records (auth and bib) in Connexion
    • MARCEdit for adding URIs to records
    • review unmatched headings to then match
    • embedding URI data to help disambiguate
    • unicode compliance for things not in unicode
    • shared authority file (ALMA for Penn)
    • OCLC WorldShare profile and other query processes with import job
    • Chicago has a fellow computationally comparing headings in Chicago bib records to OCLC
    • preference for OCLC records over vendor records - though this is nuanced (preference is more around vendor-neutral records for eResources)
  • Tooling:
    • ILS
    • external scripts
    • access database (used for Duke process)
    • LSTools (local at Cornell, https://confluence.cornell.edu/display/tsawg/Library+Services+Tools) → workflows for maintaining headings do not change authority records; create reports and act on bib records with those authorities. Depending on what is seen in global headings queue in Voyager, will feel more of less comfortable with auto-flips (flip example: name heading where death date was not originally in our data). Workflow engines being considered as among part of the solution for rebuilding for FOLIO. UXPROD-950
 - Rewrite Cornell’s Web based LS-Tools
  • Incorporate notes from the work areas discussion meetings. Wayne will kick off this discussion (Wayne, Jason)

Action Items: