Minutes for 09/28/2016

Announcements: Lloyd will be on vacation for the first three weeks of October.  Contact Brandon about any issues that arise during that time.

Action Items:

Completed

Ongoing

Discussion topics

• Bib level suppression

  • Betsey has noticed that fairly large numbers of things in Sierra are being suppressed (either completely or for Prospector) at the bib level rather than item level.  Since we share records we should usually suppress at the item level, so other people can use the bibs and decide for themselves whether they want to suppress.

  • There are two review files in Create Lists that include the items attached to these suppressed bibs.  List 19 is Prospector suppressed bibs and list 27 is completely suppressed bibs.

  • The plan decided on is to allow people to remove bibs from these lists if they want them to remain suppressed at the bib level.  Any records left on these lists after a month will be unsuppressed.

• Create List Ownership Issues

  • Lloyd noticed that there were a few review files that seem to have been created by one library and are now owned by a different library.  We had a discussion of how this might have happened.  It seems likely that people are inadvertently claiming ownership of lists.

  • We had some discussion of how owning lists works.

  • Amy was under the impression that owning a list has no effect except for changing the font red.  This is only possible if for some reason Amy has been granted Review File Administrator privileges.  Lloyd will investigate if members have been given that privilege and probably remove it if found.

• Controls on big lists?

  • Lloyd suggests that we try to put some controls on the larger buckets in Create Lists.

  • After discussion we agree that Marmot Staff could to move small lists from buckets of 25,000 or larger to correctly sized buckets after they have been there for a day.

  • If someone needs to have a list remain in a particular bucket regardless of size, then they can claim ownership of the list to signal they need it to stay there.

  • Lloyd will write up a formal policy to bring back to UCC for a formal vote then send to ASC after that.

• OCLC # prefix idea from Duplicate Subcommittee

  • The recommendation from the Duplicate Subcommittee is that we start using a prefix on the OCLC numbers in 001 fields in Sierra.  The prefix suggested is #.

  • A prefix on the 001 would prevent non-OCLC records with non-prefixed numbers from overlaying OCLC records.  There are vendors who are sending us records with non-prefixed 001 fields.  Sometimes these numbers are OCLC and sometimes they are not.  When the number is not an OCLC number it can overlay the wrong record.

  • The advantage of the # as prefix over some other prefix, is that # is the OCLC command to search for the OCLC number.  It would allow you to cut and paste directly into Connexion to search on the number.

  • Export profiles could be edited to remove the # before sending records out.  It is not certain what effect these prefixes might have on records exported to Pika.  We should check with Mark about this issue.

  • Load profiles would have to be edited to change ocl, ocn, and ocm prefixes to #.

  • We would need to do a global update to add the # onto the 001 fields in Sierra that can be clearly identified as OCLC numbers.

  • Next step would be to develop a project plan for this.

• Jamie’s idea for fixing bad 001 fields

  • Jamie suggests using the open worldcat.org to search for the OCLC titles corresponding to our 001 numbers.  A tool could be developed to search our 001 numbers in worldcat.org.  It would search the number from our 001 field, screen scrape the corresponding title from worldcat.org, then compare the title from OCLC to the title we have in Sierra.  It would produce a list of records with bad OCLC numbers.  This would solve the problem created by the zeros lost from our 001 fields and the bad 001 fields that vendors are sending.

New Action Items