Alma Cataloging User Group - March 2022
March 14, 2022 – Academic Cataloging Group Notes
Attendees: Amy Carson, Shelby Harken, Monica Struck, Tina Gross, Liz Mason, Lisa Grover, Kelly Kornkven, Jenny Grasto, Jasmine Lee, Linda Olson, Laurie McHenry
- No questions
- Bibliographic records with first indicator “9” in the 035 field. The records generally look like this:
- We talked about this last month. Liz would like to take a large sample of records and run an indication rule to verify that they all have valid 035s in them. And once that is done do a global change to remove the 035s with first indicator 9
- Shelby- agrees they do not need to be there and would like to see them go. This means there are more than one 035 lines.
- Tina- agrees, although she is not aware that they are causing any harm.
- We have a ticket into Ex Libris asking questions about the bib record match process that happens when saving in the metadata editor – 1) what is it matching on? 2) can it be turned off.
- Discussion- Metadata editor offers potential matches upon saving and some are matches and some are weird. Sometimes you will search prior to editing the record and there are no matches and then metadata editor comes up with an erroneous match. Liz found a possible toggle switch to turn off the matching upon save, but it didn’t work in the sandbox. There is a use for the match on save, and that is when you have your pre-searching and there is a record in the network zone that you want to attach your institution zone record to. Group is more interested in tightening up the matching. It seems to be looking at an array of identifiers and not just OCLC number and ISBN. It would be nice to know what the matching is based on.
- Network Zone: delete “unused” bibliographic records – completed
- Brief level rule – this was completed and applied to all records in the NZ
- Automatic deletion of NZ bibliographic record not held by other institutions setting – Liz is testing in sandboxes. Shelby also tested this out in her IZ and didn’t see any difference. Liz is inclined to not activate this until we see a reason to try again.
- Ideas for future open discussions?
- Maybe the timing is right to discuss the cataloging related NERS requests at our meeting next month.
- More vocabularies for subject headings coming from OCLC. They are talking about adding equivalent headings to LCSH to records. Do we need to do something on the Primo side so our records are not so long? In some cases, this may be confusing with foreign language headings for an English language book. Decided to add this to next month’s agenda.
- Updating the Metadata editor validation process. What are the most frequent error messages that you see and ignore?
- Discussion: When a record has an 019 the metadata editor thinks that is not a field that should be there. We want to add fields that we want to be valid. How about the OWN field do we want those to be deleted or should we make that field valid? Shelby is having staff add 972 and 975 in order to retain identity for their stuff in a record. In 972 she puts whatever she has in the 049 in OCLC. In 975 is basically UND. It migrated and it is continuing to be added to records. She likes it because she can search on it and create sets on it. Do we know of other errors that we don’t think is an error? We will continue this as an agenda item for the next meeting. We will track them and bring them to the next meeting.
- Every time you create a holdings record you get a red error message. We would prefer validation errors to come up after saving not before we begin typing. This would be an idea for a NERS request. Maybe using the option to validate the record should be enough.
- Shelby asked how often the Community Zone is enhanced with OCLC records. At a meeting she had heard about a test done on DOAJ titles with CONSER records. Often the CZ records were not being updated with CONSER records in the Community Zone.