Discussion items

Minute taker?Kirstin Kemner-Heek

PC Updates

  • Minutes
  • Implementation timelines
  • Interest in ERM

Discuss posts of Interest:

  • FOLIO release "aster" is coming out in 01/2019. PC discusses implementation plans for FOLIO.
  • Go live is pushed from 2019 to summer 2020 by Chicago, Cornell, Texas, ... but ERM could work as partial implementation.
  • German libraries: Leipzig, Dresden, Freiberg, Bremen, ZBW, Lüneburg do plan to go llive with ERM as soon as possible
  • Stakeholders meeting on Tuesday next week for more information
  • ERM: clarification about requirements - work by Ian and Khalilah to be put in Jira
  • How to push development forward in the working groups? Martina, Martina, Kristin will work on that
  • ERM: new development: outcome of the Sheffield meeting are planned to be shared
  • Ian: more work and detailed requirements will be put into JIRA to have a better overview and full understanding
  • Ann-Marie: will give us an overview about the ISBN discussion next week - please view and participate in the discuss post in the left column
Acquisitions Progress report
  • Vendor app:
    • contact information with multiple contact people
    • manage contact information in the vendor record
    • Do we need a contact module?
    • Bug fixes are in focus of developement  recently but analysis looks at the enhancement regarding "contact app"
    • wiki: "vendor module entities"
    • enhance managment of contact details, like emails, phone numbers
    • Vendors = organizations (content provider, platform or access provider): can we match the entries from ERM orgs and vendors?
    • Vendors will have this requirement regarding organizations to be used in other apps like ERM / eHoldings - shift for the module
    • Vendor organizations with different roles
    • Option: a vendor is not necessarily an institution sending invoices (paying / non-paying vendors) - needs to be indentified by a key (checkbox)
    • Validation check of vendor names before loading data
    • Reporting needs: show me open orders of exactly THIS vendor
    • Authority control for vendors?
    • But: vendor file shouldn't be the area for contact management - vendor will remain as is (no merging)
    • Contact app as second option
    • Contacts: information is technically not merely stored but referenced to
    • Store all contact data in one place with option to control the data (authority control / normalization) and assign  the data in the apps (like vendors in acq) where they are needed in th role that is assigned to the type of contact = reference to contacts apps from different other apps
  • Orders:
    • What will be able to delete in an open order?
    • bugfixes, developement goes on
    • PO number: prefixes, suffixes:
      • systems offers an ascending number by default that can be editied by adding a prefix or suffix or a total own number
      • POL will inherit this PO number added by '1 / '2 and so on
      • PO number is a whole string after saving (incl. pre- / suffix)
  • Receiving:
    • creation of backend stories is nearly finished
    • Development in focus
  • Invoicing:
    • Review mockup for invoicing next week in small group
    • Next step: backend stories
  • Finances:
    • Enhancements from UAT need to be implemented
    • Not in focus recently
    • Open for Q2 - partly ???
    • After Chalmers (not necessary for them)
    • No recommendation to do beta testing in libraries at the moment - just general checks (Chicago is interested)
  • Subscriptions:
    • defiend as ongoing orders with checkin instead of receiving
    • be part of orders
    • renewals information is available
    • no extra module
    • standing orders with no defined intervall? Workflow for finances management? Publication pattern?) Have a review next week (Ann-Marie)
  • Comment Virgina: have a use case test on the full ACQ system when it is more mature to see if it works in whole.
  • There are already use cases defined - shall we use them for that approach?
  • Ann-Marie:
    • Data import: work with Filip for matching details: what the vendors delivers against FOLIO files
    • Matching in action! But no prototyp yet
    • MM SIG: refining bibliographic MARC mapping
    • for inventory / holdings records
    • Developer:
      • Current sprint was 3 weeks long / holidays
      • last sprint of aster
      • clean up of data loader / import (EPAM team)
      • file extention settings and control over
      • jobs, match, action profiles will be built in Q1
      • MARC bibliogaphic profile in Q2
      • ISBN issues in discuss post (Q1)
      • Marc bibliographic records are now stored in inventory → move them to the new source record storage for multiple use: starts next week in a working group
    • Source record storage will become "source of truth"
    • This weeks forum will take place later and announced
    • Codex in MM SIG yesterday - shall we have that in ERM subgroup too?
      • has huge impact on ERM and ACQ!
      • ERM is involved in Codex? 
      • What is the goal of the codex presentation?
        • Feedback of TC?
        • Codex a solution in search of a problem?
        • Codex should be discussed in RM SIG, too, because it covers a lot of functionalities
        • from chat: Von Ann-Marie Breaux an alle:  04:02 PM

          I have to leave, but I agree - I would want a presentation here in RM SIG, but not until we know that this is a path that we'll actually be taking  - so after Tech Council"

        • Ian: We should do this after the TC's feedback


Von Ian Ibbotson an alle:  03:01 PM

Thanks dennis - is that included in the search by name?

- it's more about that function than the data I think - maybe I just didn't normalise the name or something?

Von Ann-Marie Breaux an alle:  03:04 PM

Hi Ian: aliases are included in the seach by "all" and search by "alias" but not (currently) search by "name". For a good example, try searching by ybp, which is an alias for GOBI Library Solutions

Von Ian Ibbotson an alle:  03:07 PM

Ok - we can definitely try the name search first and if that fails to match, an alias search second - do you think that would work?

actually that might be better for us as we then know we have a non-preferred term if we match on an alias

Action items