(Test load) Bibliographic records to leave out of the NZ

Legend: not started IN PROGRESS STALLED decided

Recommendation

This decision only encompasses whether a given category of bibliographic record should be added into the Alma Network Zone 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. This decision also does not indicate types of records that should be left out of the NZ after migration during regular day-to-day work. Lastly, further guidance on Shelf-ready, MARCIVE and Special Collections records is forthcoming on separate decision pages.

To the extent possible, the following categories of records should be left out of the Alma NZ:

• Records for local equipment

• Suppressed records

• Records for non-library reserves resources (i.e., personal copy)

• Records marked for deletion

• On the fly records

• Records with cat dates but otherwise lacking inventory/orders

• Records with sharing limitations (see separate page on shelf-ready https://uc-sils.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/RMF/pages/750616782 )

  • From the Technical Services Escalation Group: Records with sharing limitations should not be exported into the Network Zone. 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. 

• 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 (this refers to records for finding aids, not records with finding aids on them since those records should fall into another category)

• Bound-with records

• Records for locally-subscribed e-resources (for further guidance on e-resources see: https://uc-sils.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/AEF/pages/860717215 )

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 materials on order***

• Special Collections records (further guidance forthcoming)

• Uncataloged records (however brief)

• Campus RLF records: See separate decision page https://uc-sils.atlassian.net/wiki/pages/resumedraft.action?draftId=839352340

See also separate decision page for MARCIVE:

Note: For categories left up to each campus, the overall quality of the bibliographic data should be considered, along with potential impacts on other records coming into the NZ. Records left out of the the NZ during migration can be linked to the NZ afterwards. Campuses should also consider the potential loss of their own local data in the event that another campus record becomes the NZ master record.

Reasoning:

The Vanguard page original had separate categories for “brief records including materials on order” and “uncataloged records beyond brief records.” RMFG decided that “brief” was not a criteria that we could pin down for the purposes of migration and that the real issue was whether a system-wide decision could be made surrounding “on order” records, however full. RMFG agreed to test “on order” records during test load to determine what the workload implication are in order to make a more final recommendation for go-live.

The group agreed that locally-licensed e-resource record should be brought into the NZ if the campus is migrating them since they would benefit from the same potential enhancement that shared bibs as physical titles. There was discussion around visibility in Primo since the NZ search scope can be configured to either hide or display portfolios for local campuses. The group recognizes that there might be some user frustration in seeing e-resources that aren’t actually available but also feels that there is potential value in turnaway data and notes that to some extent that will happen with some of the CDL data. The records could be unlinked or the Primo search scopes adjusted post-migration if needed but the data would be hard to get back if not migrated into the NZ in the first place.

***Assessment for Test Load

RMFG was split on whether “on order” items should be brought into the NZ during migration. There are potentially significant workload concerns either way. For test load, campuses who wish to migrate their bibliographic records for “on order” items into the NZ will need to provide a sample list of MMS IDs to RMFG so that campuses can determine what the impacts are. Specifically, RMFG is concerned that records for items on order may consistently be shorter or otherwise lower quality than records that another campus may have brought over during migration.

Background

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?

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.

Questions to consider

• 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:

      • https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Implementation_and_Migration/Migration_Guides_and_Tutorials/010Alma_Migration_Considerations_for_Consortia

      • 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 Log