|
This decision only encompasses whether a given category of bibliographic record should be added into the Alma Network Zone for the Vanguard during data migration. It does not address whether a given category of record should be migrated into a campus IZ or how to prevent those records from being migrated into the NZ, that will be left up to ILS Data Cleanup and the local campus groups. It also acknowledges that there will be errors during the migration and data extract process.
To the extent possible, the following categories of records should be left out of the Alma NZ:
Records for local equipment
Records for non-library reserves resources (i.e., personal copy)
Records marked for deletion
On the fly records
Other records lacking OCLC numbers
Records without OCLC numbers should only load into IZ
Campuses can add them to the NZ post-migration using linking jobs
To the extent possible, the following categories of records should definitely be added to the Alma NZ:
Monograph records for analyzed serials lacking inventory (item record is linked to the serial record)
Finding aids
Bound-with records
The remaining categories listed below will be left to the discretion of each campus:
Records for campus DDA programs
SCP will load their DDA records since they are part of the UC shared collection
Records for locally-subscribed e-resources
Suppressed records/Suppressed records with paid/cancelled orders
Campuses should be wary of the fact that suppression is “inherited” in the NZ: if the first record in is suppressed, then all subsequent matches will also be suppressed, regardless of whether they were suppressed in the originating system
Ideally, suppressed records should generally not be migrated into the NZ but for the Vanguard there will be circumstances that make it impossible to leave them out and they will provide a good opportunity for testing
Brief records without cat dates, including brief records for materials on order
Uncataloged records (beyond brief records)
Bib records with cat date but without attached items, orders or holdings
Campus RLF records
Some campuses may want to migrate their copy of a given RLF record if they have additional local holdings or if they want to compare their copy of the record with the copy loaded as part of the RLF data
Campus RLF records for analyzed serials where RLF only has the serial bib
MARCIVE and other records with sharing limitations
From the Technical Services Escalation Group: Records with sharing limitations should not be exported into the Network Zone. However, given the Vanguard environment is just a UC sandbox, it will not matter if any record sets with restrictions migrate to the NZ at this point. Campuses should strive to make themselves aware by the time of the actual implementation of any record sets with such sharing restrictions, so that they may negotiate with the provider the broader UC sharing of the data, or if that is not possible make plans for the data to migrate no further than the IZ.
TSELG has started to collect information on each campus's licenses/contracts (related to vendor services) and will work with CDL for any needed attempts at joint negotiation of records prior to full cut-over. We will share the information with you as we make progresses.
See separate decision pages for MARCIVE and Shelf-ready
Other records lacking inventory
Campuses will document their local decisions regarding each category for assessment in the Vanguard and to help make final decisions for go-live
Reasoning:
There are so many categories of records and each campus has different reasons for wanting them in or out of the NZ along with varying capacities for cleanup. There are a few clear choices that can be made but otherwise the rest of the decisions surrounding which records a given campus can/should add to the NZ should be left up to them for testing in the Vanguard. Since so many of these categories impact so many other groups, it makes more sense to keep the options open and allow for a wider range of assessment options.
Assessment for Vanguard:
Each category can be re-considered and input from other stakeholders can be solicited, including Fulfillment, Discovery, Acq/ERM and Special Collections.
Campuses expressed a desire for more guidance with regard to each category and so extensive discussion with other groups and post-migration testing will be needed.
Campuses also expressed a need to test how campus RLF data shows up in the Vanguard since some campuses have a need to record the provenance of items for faculty, selectors, etc.
The ILS Data Cleanup Group would like advice on whether there are other groups of records that campuses should plan on leaving out of the Network Zone?
All SCP records will be loaded directly into the Network Zone. Campus records will be loaded into their own IZ first and then matched against the NZ.
For purposes of discovery, there may be categories of records that should stay in a local IZ instead of being matched against the NZ.
This decision does not need to include recommendations about how records get left out of the NZ, ILSDC will handle the logistics.
This decision is not meant to dictate what a campus will or will not migrate into their own IZ.
This decision does not prohibit additions to the NZ after migration.
Records for campus DDA programs
SCP will load their DDA records
Records for locally-subscribed e-resources
Records for local equipment
Leave out of the NZ
Records for non-library reserves resources (i.e., personal copy)
Leave out of the NZ
Brief records for materials on order
Monograph records for analyzed serials lacking inventory (item record is linked to the serial record)
Bring these over
Other records lacking inventory
Suppressed records
Keep in mind that suppression is “inherited” in the NZ: if the first record in is suppressed, then all subsequent matches will also be suppressed, regardless of whether they were suppressed in the original system
Records marked for deletion
Leave out of the NZ
Bound with records
Bring these over
Brief records without cat dates
Bib records with cat date but without attached items, orders or holdings
On the fly records?
Leave out of the NZ
‘Uncataloged records’
Campus RLF records
Campus RLF records for analyzed serials where RLF only has the serial bib
Suppressed records with paid/cancelled orders?
Other records lacking OCLC numbers?
Records without OCLC numbers will only load into IZ (Liz will confirm)
From ExLibris:
This is correct, any records that campus wants to load into the NZ will have be done after migration. You can match on OCLC or non OCLC during migration, but not both.
Post-migration there are a lot more fields that can be used to link IZ records with the NZ, campuses will be able to create sets of their own records and use different matching methods to create IZ:NZ links.
Creating fake numbers to force a load (Liz will confirm and warn)
Any 035 with a prefix “(OCoLC)” will be considered an OCLC number for the purposes of migration. This means that “fake” numbers are possible.
From ExLibris:
QUESTION: in theory could a campus create 035 data like this:
(OCoLC)ucsd1234567
In order to get the record added to the NZ?
RESPONSE:
The ucsd would not be stripped during the migration process. Please note that if the IZ record contains 035 $a (OCoLC)ucsd1234567, this is what will be used to match to NZ records:
Scenario 1)
IZ: 035 $a (OCoLC)ucsd1234567
NZ:035 $a (OCoLC)ucsd1234567
Outcome of IZ-NZ linking job: match made
Scenario 2)
IZ: 035 $a (OCoLC)ucsd1234567
NZ:035 $a (OCoLC)1234567
Outcome of IZ-NZ linking job: no match made
Would this be any easier than batch linking after migration? Are the risks of incorrect matches too high?
MARCIVE
Escalated to TS Escalation leaders
Finding aids
Should be in the NZ. Campuses can investigate whether they want to try to use something like OAC In the CZ or link local IZ records. The effect of either decision can be tested and assessed with the SC CKG during the Vanguard.
Any other records that would/could be added to Alma/Primo from an external source?
Records with sharing limitations
Escalated to TS Escalation leaders
Action/Point Person | Expected Completion Date | Notes | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
FG members get initial reactions/input from campuses to bring to June 16 meeting | Before June 16 | Done | |
Solicit Discovery FG input for critical categories | Before June 30 | Halted | |
Send draft to RM FG for final review | June 19 | Done | |
Final RM FG vote | June 23 | Done | |
Routed to PPC for approval | June 26 | Done | |
Routed to ILSDC | June 26 | Done |