Date and Time
Thursday 03/12/20, 3pm Eastern
Zoom URL
https://lyrasis.zoom.us/j/897871318
Participants
James Griffin (Unlicensed) (Note taker)
Goals
Discussion topics
Time | Item | Presenter | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
5 min | Ice Breaker Question: What, if any, is your caffeinated beverage of choice? | ||
15 min | Standing item: review metadata tickets | Specific tickets =flagged for us by Christine Di Bella The following specific tickets (included above) are ones DevPri would like assistance on (as time allows): ANW-412, ANW-475, ANW-1047. | |
10 min | Review agent mappings | “Would there be any time and/or interest in reviewing some data maps related to the agents module work, specifically import/export for agents as EAC-CPF and one for a standalone import/export for agents as MARCXML?” | |
20 min | Review MARC import | MARC 5XX, 65X, agent, and other fields import review complete; notes below. How to best publish this? | |
5 min | Export review process | Create one or more complete records with field names; save the json to our github; use this to text MARC and EAD2002 export | |
5 min | Anything else? |
Proposed MARC 520 bug report
Title: MARC importer bug - 520 not importing correctly
The MARC importer is not handling the 520 field correctly.
For 520 fields where indicator 1 is {blank, 1, 2}, the data is imported into a general note type instead of scope and content note type.
Note that for 520 fields where indicator 1 is {3, 8}, the importer works correctly, importing in an abstract note / dropping the note entirely, respectively.
Test record:
Proposed Improvements
Add import capability for 583 (mapped to Processing Information note)
Add import capability for 555 (mapped to Other Finding aids; tricky though as this is used inconsistently). Alternately, ask Lyrasis to publish how they handle custom modifications for importing 555 and 856 fields to various AS fields.
MARC 65X review
*650, 656, 657 - small issues, should adjust documentation but no AS fix needed.
MARC agent review
*100/600/700 and 110/610/710 work reasonably close to the documentation. Main issue is note respecting the source indicators. Ticket?
*130 and 630 appear to work, 730 does not. 1) Ticket to allow 730; 2) Document this (X3X not mentioned at all)
*Feature request for all agents and subjects - import $0 into an authfile URI field? Is this already underway as part of the agents module work
MARC Other Fields review
*001 is ignored; feature request to map to identifier? Either way, document.
*008 works, but not entirely intuitive as to date behavior; should be documented.
*300 - if the importer can’t parse data (numeric in $a, a known extent type in $f), it defaults to “1 linear feet”.
Document what vocab this maps to.
Also, it’s kind of a mess. Consider reviewing in toto what’s going on, and how to improve it.
Notes
(Ice Breaker Responses)
Reviewing metadata tickets
There were some tickets which might not need to be evaluated any long
ANW-412: VRA core for exporting digital objects
This is a fairly old ticket, there was disagreement about whether or not this was even desirable
Linked issue was closed as complete/duplicate
We are primarily concerned with the published mappings for the tier 1 standard
Christine
This is from the early day of the program…this can be used for linking to more robust digital object metadata
Most aren’t using ArchivesSpace with VRA core to provide more robust metadata for digital objects
Important for ASpace to always be thinking of what should be supported for core
ANW-475
Lydia noticed that there is a Dublin Core mapping already
Is this subteam going to evaluate this mapping?
Christine:
Project was ongoing during 2017, Dublin Core map is pretty close to the end
It is Dublin Core and not MARC
We can reach out to Adrian Pruitt - it might be worth investigating, as the mapping seems to be fairly far along
We should then keep this ticket upon, we are unlikely to get to it this year
We need to prioritize this as Tier 1