Meeting Minutes for 12/16/2020

• Delta county is live in Sierra 

• Lloyd just heard back from EBSCO about figuring out a new way to get our files to EDS.  The script that has been sending our files to EDS for several years has stopped working and we need to figure out a new method to send the files.  Lloyd wants to use Sierra Scheduler. <<Action Item

• Duplicates team worked on FOLIO gap analysis.  In January, Brandon wants to work on analysing FOLIO to find the functions we need that it can’t do.

Completed action items

• Binge box order records and the standard process for dummy items
  • ​​Binge box materials tend to only be holdable within the owning library. Our standard dummy item is holdable to everyone. The question then is should materials that are only holdable to the owning library have dummy items with more specific i-types so that patrons aren't able to place a hold on something they may never receive.
  • Jo says she has a problem with this where patrons will put holds on binge boxes.  Since the binge boxes are not holdable the patrons are disappointed.  
  • Lloyd asks why are there dummy items on these at all?  Aren’t they created locally?​
    • These are being purchased from vendors.  Order records are downloaded from vendors, therefore creating holdable dummy items like with any other order.​
  • Jo asks if she can delete the dummy items?  Can her patrons put holds on things that only have order records?
  • Betsey suggests we use the same process we use for video games that also can’t be requested.​
    • We had the same issue with video games.  We created a special load profile for video games that didn’t create a dummy at all.
    • We created these because the holdability of the bib follows from the first item attached.  If the first item attached could not be requested then the bib could not be requested and that didn’t change even when more items were added.  The dummy item ensures that the first item created could be requested, so the bib would be requestable.
    • The video game loader is load table J in Data Exchange.​
  • Nina points out that Delta has a lot of binge boxes as well.  Leah says they have binge boxes, but haven’t figured out lending yet.
  • Nina asks what is the effect of order records on holds.  We think that orders records make bibs holdable until an item is added.  When an item is added then the hold rules for that itype take over.
  • Tammy chats text from our documentation saying that records with on-order status make bibs holdable but only by the library with the record, not other libraries.  The text is not clear about whether it means order records or item records with on-order status.  Both types of records could have on-order status.
  • Nina says that when she orders obscure foreign DVDs, she assumes they will be the only one with a copy, and they don’t lend those DVDs.​
    • In that case it makes sense to delete the dummy item so people who can’t get the item won’t be able to request it.​
  • Binge boxes seem to be the same as video games.  They are not requestable by other libraries.
  • We change the description of the video game loader (J) so it is clear that it could be used anytime you don’t want to create a dummy holdable item.  It is not just for video games.​
• Indexing of 490​
  • We currently have the 440 field in the title and series title indexes.  The 490 is not indexed at all.  
  • This is from III, “Originally, your library did have the 490 indexed, but in 2007 your library requested to remove the phrase indexing, leaving only the KEYWORD indexing for 490.
  • Yes, we can reinstate the indexing rule for you -- would you like it to be indexed similar to the 440?
  • > SERIES(s)        440    REM  0146x      TITLE(t)
  • > SERIES(s)        440    KEEP a          SERIES TITLE(h)”
  • Our records currently index 830s but not 490s.
  • Jamie says the 440 moved to 830.  4xx fields were never traced.
  • The 490 field is the transcribed field.  You copy directly from the item for the 490 and put the authorized form in the 830.
  • The problem is that it is common that the 490 is the only series field you get because the Library of Congress no longer creates 830 fields if there is not already an authorized series title.  In that case, the series title will not be traced in our system.
  • We decided not to trace the 4xx fields 15 years ago, but that was before the change in policy at LC.
  • Jamie says it would be messy to include the uncontrolled stuff in the 490.
  • If people want to be sure a series title is in our series title index, then they have to make sure there is an authorized title in the 830.  If Library of Congress didn’t do it, then we have to if we want it indexed.
    • This should be explained in the cataloging policy document.
  • This does not affect VuFind or Pika.  This is the index in Classic catalog and in Sierra.
  • Jamie asks if our authority vendor will add 830 fields from 490s?
    • Yes, if there is a match between a 490 and an authorized series, but often the transcribed title does not match the authorized title, which is why we have the two separate fields.  If they don’t match, then they will send us a report, which gets inserted into the MARC record as a note.
  • We decide to leave it as it is, but to document this in the Marmot Cataloging Policy Document. << Action Item
• Prioritize gap analysis document
  • https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jy4bJfmw7MBwIauw_9Qr-YpG0Y1qTE8DKqvKHWeF8RA/edit#gid=0
  • We have a discussion of prioritizing the Gap analysis. 
  • We determine that Collection Development topics should be decided by a different group.  That’s not directly in the UCC’s area of responsibility, and we don’t really have time today.

Ongoing Action Items

 Next Duplicates Sub-committee meeting: Jan 13, 2021