One of the sprint 2 goals is to start working with received holdings data. The Nov 13 story time focused on this.
We're concerned about the variety of holdings data we might see, and expect three flavors:
1) item data, system specific;
2) Embedded MARC Holdings Records (i.e. following the MHLD spec)
3) Embedded MHLD-like data but serialized differently (e.g. Penn's use of h52 and itm fields, instead of 852 and 87x[?] respectively)
4) Linked holdings records serialized distinctly. This is probably the scenario we want to avoid.
We should provide some guidance to data providers about how we want to receive their data, which could include preferred serializations. As Bob suggested, many institutions are probably used to coming up with specific export profiles for consortia/services like BD.
anarchivist
commented
4 years ago
One of the sprint 2 goals is to start working with received holdings data. The Nov 13 story time focused on this.
We're concerned about the variety of holdings data we might see, and expect three flavors:
1) item data, system specific; 2) Embedded MARC Holdings Records (i.e. following the MHLD spec) 3) Embedded MHLD-like data but serialized differently (e.g. Penn's use of
h52anditmfields, instead of852and87x[?] respectively) 4) Linked holdings records serialized distinctly. This is probably the scenario we want to avoid.We should provide some guidance to data providers about how we want to receive their data, which could include preferred serializations. As Bob suggested, many institutions are probably used to coming up with specific export profiles for consortia/services like BD.
(Converted to an issue from a card)