2021-05-04 Meeting notes

Updates (please add in advance)

10 mins

Liz:

Update on some cutover deadlines

Final SCP LHR decision

Final SCP data migration decision

UCB:

• During the Freeze we’ll continue our ILS clean-up, and we’ll catalog in OCLC, says our Head.

• Our people working on labeling are discussing where we want to put our decimal point: all on one line, 3365.6? or, one line = 3365, and the next line = .6?

UCLA:

• Trying to reconcile all the IZ/NZ issues that are cropping up in the Acq-to-Cat workflow. (Biggest problem is that import profiles can only match on IZ or NZ, not both.)

• Much hand-wringing about authority control.

• Goal is to train people on very basic day 1 workflows before we lose access to our test database; then develop more robust training for after go-live.

• RLF Configuration Task Force - hoping to delay survey until early 2022, since we don’t think people know enough about Alma/Primo functionality to answer questions about it until ~six months after go-live. (That would push decision until later in 2022.)

• Thinking about holdings templates--does anyone know which fixed fields are important to code correctly in Alma? Any tips?

  • Please add here

Cutover meeting on Thursday.

CDL/SCP:

• SCP Import profile matching by MMSID preferring to use Overlay all fields but local: No further input was received. I take silence as your consent

• Resource access limitation: public note or authentication note? or access model in POL? --Need feedback from all campuses, or is this something to be harmonized? it would help with troubleshooting access issue

• Database level access: models for one to many, has taken to AEFG to be discussed tomorrow

.

Shared rules

Review spreadsheet for common fields; talk about vocabularies that do/don’t belong in the NZ

Data removed during OCLC export

6XX fields: which ones do we love, which ones do we hate, which ones are we indifferent to?

We’re reluctant to force all campuses to have the same practices, due to rules about student workers and copy cataloging, foreign language vocabularies, etc. However,

• 655 $4 should be stripped

• also 938, 948

• 029 fields can be stripped

We’ll give it more thought

OCLC# in NZ

Can we require OCLC numbers in NZ bibs?

Both NRLF and SRLF have large stores of records with no OCLC numbers. Are they the exception and does RMFG want to formally ask that the RLFs prioritize that cleanup post-migration?

From Hermine:

• SRLF has about 85K unsuppressed records without OCLC numbers.

• Film and Television Archive has 45K unsuppressed records without OCLC numbers; they were hoping to add to NZ post-migration, but are ok with leaving them in IZ or pursuing reclamation.

• I’d also like to talk about Acquisitions workflows. EOCR records (for Gobi, etc.) first come in with no OCLC numbers; then, later, acquisitions runs the update inventory import profile with the full records. If that is all done in the IZ, a follow-up job has to be done to link the records to the NZ, potentially losing some of that full data, if the existing NZ record is not full. BUT, doing it in the NZ could cause big matching problems, since it might rely on ISBN matching.

  • AEFG is currently testing that workflow for those reasons. There are a lot of complications with splitting EOCR (an other) on order imports b/t the IZ and NZ when it comes to the “update inventory” profile. AEFG has a question out to the SUNYs as well.

  • It’s probably about time for the RMFG/AEFG group to meet again to talk through some updates and see what the options are.

UCB: NRLF has questions about its records that lack OCLC numbers, and Fulfillment

We think this would be a good practice, but there are two concerns:

1. What would be the implications for fulfillment if the RLF records lack OCLC numbers?

2. What about brief records for ordered materials?

Best practices document

Review test load doc and see if we want to keep the same format

Some SUNY documentation:https://slcny.libguides.com/c.php?g=986218&p=7248748

MVP items

RMFG-MVP-003:

Best practices and training documents for exporting records from OCLC into Alma using the Gateway

• How close are we to final?

• Can we recommend the NZ Gateway + some step 2 (probably a template) as the RMFG-approved way?

  • From Hermine: Should we ask CDL to change the validation rules to prevent local extensions being added to the NZ? Basecamp post about local extensions in the NZ

  • From Yoko: UCR would like to go with the IZ gateway + norm rules/template.

We should make workflows documents for the NZ Gateway and the IZ Gateway processes, as recommendations, but there will still be variation between campuses and within departments. The workflows should show how to get local fields into the records.

NZ Authority Control Task List

Orbis Cascade, CSU and WRLC have either already or are preparing to turn of authority control in the NZ.

• WRLC recommendation

• SUNY policy (based off of WRLC)

What do we want to continue testing?

How else do we locate sets of authority records for update?

Is there a way to get the ACTL-type reports out of Alma (headings w/o matches, etc.) without running the linking jobs? (-HV)

• Maybe?

ELUNA paper: Tomren, Holly and Finnigan, Leanne and Gomez, Ligia (2020) Authority Control in Alma: Comparing Workflows and Results.

The preferred term correction job in Alma is universally panned and no one uses it. Other Alma users do authority control in OCLC.

Is there a way to get lists of mis-matched headings to make manual authority control easier?

Is there a way to set the NZ validation profile to not allow improper local information to be added?