Instances, UX iteration 3, English

Please note: This video presents our optimal vision for this feature in FOLIO; What you see in this prototype is what we are working towards in the long run, and might not all be present in the first, developed version. Please help us improve it — share your questions, constructive feedback and ideas in the comments below.

Latest UX prototype:

Video walk-through

Questions:

1. Can holdings records be optional?
2. If there are cases with no holding records - what situations could that be?
3. Would you create a new holding record if different locations?
4. Would you create a holding record if there is only one item?
5. How often do you edit holdings records?
6. Should we display holdings records together with the item data?
7. How would you relink to different holdings records, if e.g. an item record is moved from on holdings-record to another - by drag and drop ?
8. Do holdings data get imported, in other situations than when migration of a collection?
9. When editing a holding record, would that preferrably be in MARC format?

Can holdings records be optional? IMHO they should be, yes

If there are cases with no holding records - what situations could that be? Depends on the institution: my former institution doesn’t do holdings records for individual barcoded items & creates holdings records only for serials; my current institution creates holdings records for everything, if there are records for individual items, they are attached to the holdings

Would you create a new holding record if different locations? For an institution that uses holdings, yes, this would be a use case
Would you create a holding record if there is only one item? _I (personally) wouldn’t, but that is currently what my institution does _
How often do you edit holdings records? It varies, for some monographs, maybe rarely if ever, for a serial it could be quite frequent
Should we display holdings records together with the item data? yes if there is a holdings record, it should display with its associated items
How would you relink to different holdings records, if e.g. an item record is moved from on holdings-record to another - by drag and drop ? Drag & drop would be awesome
Do holdings data get imported, in other situations than when migration of a collection? not sure
When editing a holding record, would that preferrably be in MARC format? probably not, the MARC format for holdings data is ugly

1. Can holdings records be optional?
   At my current institution, we only create holdings records for serials. We use item records for both print serials and for monographs (and other materials). So yes, they can be. But if the holdings can be automatically generated based on item records (for non-serials), it might create a nice consistency to have them.
2. If there are cases with no holding records - what situations could that be?
   As stated above, my current institution does not create holdings for anything but serials. And for freely available e-serials we have a holdings record with no actual holdings information (no enumeration or chronology, just a location).
3. Would you create a new holding record if different locations?
   We currently do, and I’ve been questioning how useful that is. In our system, the holdings record is tied to our receiving workflow, including label creation, and that has influenced our practices.
4. Would you create a holding record if there is only one item?
   For serials, yes. Sometimes holdings data can be more granular, for instance representing that an issue is missing from a bound volume. Also, because holdings can be represented and transmitted in MARC (for instance, sent to OCLC), holdings statements can impact other libraries services such as ILL.
5. How often do you edit holdings records?
   This depends largely on how we acquire materials. If we know we will continue to receive something, or if the holdings are closed, they won’t be edited. If we receive only some issues (or if we have known gaps), we might edit holdings with each volume received.
6. Should we display holdings records together with the item data?
   Yes. They are definitely related and it’s nice to see them together to get the “big picture.”
7. How would you relink to different holdings records, if e.g. an item record is moved from on holdings-record to another - by drag and drop ?
   I’m having a hard time picturing this. But in general, drag and drop is intuitive and easy.
8. Do holdings data get imported, in other situations than when migration of a collection?
   We import holdings data monthly (from Serials Solutions) for our electronic serial subscriptions. We also routinely export holdings data (to OCLC).
9. When editing a holding record, would that preferrably be in MARC format?
   I’d prefer that, but I can imagine cases where it would be preferable to have non-MARC options. It depends on who is editing the record and why. This is probably not relevant for v1, but I wish in our current system we could allow some staff members to edit notes only but not the MARC fields in our holdings records.

Just a couple quick notes:

8.Do holdings data get imported, in other situations than when migration of a collection?
Depending on whether a holding is created for a single physical monograph or e-resource or not, then the library might get holdings creation info in a MARC record or API feed from their materials vendor. Same with item records. If the materials vendor is supplying cataloging records and/or shelfready processing, then they may be supplying holdings-level info and item-level info such as location, call number, barcode number, and URL.

9.When editing a holding record, would that preferably be in MARC format?
Not sure if this matters. If we’re starting with the MARC holdings format as the structure for the data, then so long as that data is captured somehow and can be structured as a MARC holdings output from FOLIO, then it doesn’t seem important to me that we require holdings editing in FOLIO using a MARC structure or not.

Drag and drop would be great. Ideally, one could select multiple item records (I’ve worked on projects we had to move hundreds in increments of 50) and drag them all at once. Additionally, it is often necessary to reorder the item records before they are moved so they are in order. That make it easy to see if any volume or issue is missing. Also, is there a limit as to how many item records can be attached to a holdings? We have a guideline of no more than 800 in case we ever migrate to a new LMS.

Also hopefully there is an “undo” function in case the items are dragged to the wrong holdings.

Note: I have added a video walk-through to the original post.

1. Can holdings records be optional?
   They should be optional, but there should also be the ability to enforce when they are optional or required. For example, we might require holdings for our Marc records, but not require them for our Dublin core Items.
2. If there are cases with no holding records - what situations could that be?
   Not sure when our institution might not have holdings.
3. Would you create a new holding record if different locations? Yes
4. Would you create a holding record if there is only one item? Yes
5. How often do you edit holdings records?
   Depends on the type of the item. A normal book might never have its holdings record updated, but serial might change frequently
6. Should we display holdings records together with the item data?
   Yes, being easily able to see and move between bib, holdings, and item data is very important
7. How would you relink to different holdings records, if e.g. an item record is moved from on holdings-record to another - by drag and drop?
   I never actually do this type of work, so don’t really know what would be easiest. Drag and drop does sound nicer than transcribing the unique identifiers from one to the other though, and less prone for error.
8. Do holdings data get imported, in other situations than when migration of a collection?
   I think our special collections does some workflow where they export holdings from their system (Archive Space, I think?) and into Aleph. I’m not sure if the holdings is exported in Marc or changed in the interim.
9. When editing a holding record, would that preferably be in MARC format?
   Marc holdings records are clunky to be sure, but they are also well established and defined. If something replaced it, it should be easily mappable to the Marc standard.

some thoughts as I watch the video - can more than one person open a record simultaneously? If one person makes edits while another has the record open, how will the person who isn’t making edits be aware changes were made? How are edits saved? And, does the page time out if left open a long time?

(Answers with @natascha)

Can holdings records be optional?
In an ideal situation,holdings records would be optional. A holdings record is redundant for a single volume monograph with one copy assuming that location, call number, and copy number can be conveyed in the item record as well as the holdings record.

If there are cases with no holding records - what situations could that be?
Single volume monograph with one copy. If there are multiple copies and each of those copies were housed in unique locations, holdings records would not be required. Again, this is assuming that location, call number, and copy number can be conveyed in the item record.

Would you create a new holding record if different locations?
Yes, if a holdings record is required (serials, multi-part monographs, etc.)

Would you create a holding record if there is only one item?
We do right now because it is required by our system, but it serves no real purpose that could not be served by a stand-alone item record.

How often do you edit holdings records?
For serials / multi-part monos for which new material is being received, the holdings record is updated as new volumes / issues arrive. In general, editing holdings records is a component in these daily workflows.

Should we display holdings records together with the item data?
Yes.

How would you relink to different holdings records, if e.g. an item record is moved from on holdings-record to another - by drag and drop ?
Drag and drop would be a preferred way of doing this. Our current system requires a multi-step process that involves selecting records in a file management interface. This is not intuitive and much less efficient than drag and drop.

Do holdings data get imported, in other situations than when migration of a collection?
Holdings data is regularly imported; it is also frequently set as constant data when creating holdings records in batch.

When editing a holding record, would that preferrably be in MARC format?
We do not maintain our holdings in MARC. We use an editor in the ILS and the data is maintained in the system database.

I have questions related to e-resources: currently in Kuali OLE we have a holdings record for print and an “e-holdings” record for online resources. Online resources do not have item records. There are a number of challenges with having the e-holdings record, as sometimes there are things you can do to a holdings record that you can’t do with an e-holdings record. If we have holdings/item records, how do we envision electronic content being managed? How is the instances/holdings information related to the work Frontside is doing with e-holdings and KB integration? It would be great to be able to link to the KB and update coverage data/holdings data in one place and have the change propagated out (whether that change starts in FOLIO or starts in the KB). At the same time, the KB information is generally not as complete as what might be needed for ERM purposes (e.g., perpetual access dates may be needed to be recorded for management purposes; whereas an KB is only generally interested in tracking access entitlements). I’m interested in understanding how these things are going to relate.

Dennis is spot on for this from a special collections point of view, I think. In terms of item 8, we do indeed import holdings information from non-MARC databases, including Archives Space. We might want to consider this in the context of linked open data and the potential for linking to digital representations of our collections.
For item 9, I agree that MARC holdings are clunky but by virtue of the sheer volume of them, any format we use should be easily mappable to MARC holdings. I seem to recall some special collections libraries made the decision to locate their copy specific notes in the Holdings record as opposed to the bib record. This could be a challenge point for display, searching, and mapping.