search

pulibrary / figgy

Valkyrie-based digital repository backend.
Other
35 stars 4 forks source link

I would like a report of everything in figgy with arks, including all bib ids with associated arks. #4240

Open kelea99 opened 4 years ago

kelea99 commented 4 years ago

issue: There is not a holding record for all digitized surrogates that show up in the PUL online catalog

Reason: 852 electronic holdings records and/or arks in the 856 are not present in the voyager record

Possible fix: @kevinreiss mentioned that he and @mzelesky would probably be able to perform a global refresh for the voyager records, to ensure we populate the 856 with any and all arks for digitized content in figgy. They would need a report of everything with arks from figgy (including bib ids with associated arks) to do the global refresh in voyager.

Question regarding a potential way forward in the future: Can we set up a scheduled task (generated every weekly, like vendor records for voyager), in order to ensure the arks/etc... are updated in Voyager?

kelea99 commented 4 years ago

Update: after a discussion with @kelynch, we think it would be better to generate a report that includes only Visibility open, complete state items in figgy. @kelynch is generating a report for complete, open visibility items from Patron Requests as a first pass.

tpendragon commented 4 years ago

We used to have the "Identifiers to Reconcile" report to do this (https://figgy.princeton.edu/reports/identifiers_to_reconcile). It takes a while to load now - I think Joyce was using it for a while to add 856s? I sort of assumed we were so far behind at this point that we'd be waiting until Alma so we could programmatically add 856s to everything.

You can get a CSV of the result here: https://figgy.princeton.edu/reports/identifiers_to_reconcile.csv

It doesn't return everything - it tries to just return those things that don't have the ARK in the catalog already.

kelea99 commented 4 years ago

@tpendragon, Thank you! We may have found a faster/easier way to do this with @kevinreiss team. Hence the revisiting now. it apparently sounds like they could do something like what they do with vendor records?

tpendragon commented 4 years ago

Works for me. Does the above report work for your purposes? It might be missing maps.

kelea99 commented 4 years ago

@tpendragon I have not gotten any requests for ark reconciliation for maps since I gave Wangyal and Berta access to the macros joyce provided me on June 17, 2019. I believe they may be doing this themselves now? worth looking, however, which I am happy to do. regarding the ark identifiers to reconcile csv. Yes, in theory that is what we need. Question: does the csv include arks for items that are not open visibility (ex. private/rr only/etc)?

tpendragon commented 4 years ago

Question: does the csv include arks for items that are not open visibility (ex. private/rr only/etc)?

Yes. It's all complete ScannedResources which have ARKs.

kelea99 commented 4 years ago

ok. mentioned this to @escowles and @kelynch, and Im not sure whether or not it is good practice to add the arks in voyager to items that are private/restricted in figgy.

escowles commented 4 years ago

Since this will trigger inclusion in the Online facet, it would be good to suppress private items to avoid frustrating users who could not access the online content.

kelea99 commented 4 years ago

As a test, @kelynch created a spreadsheet for this. She combed the IIIF manifest for the Patron Requests collection while not logged into Figgy (so the private and Reading Room materials shouldn't appear there). There are 183 items returned (180 open/complete; 3 pending; 1 flagged). It was successful. I handed over a link to the spreadsheet to @kevinreiss and @mzelesky to see if it sufficient for their needs.

kelea99 commented 4 years ago

@kelynch had a conversation with @tpendragon , who thought it shouldn't be too much work to modify the arks-to-reconcile report (https://figgy.princeton.edu/reports/identifiers_to_reconcile) that we currently have in Figgy to return all of the arks and bibs for all open visibility items in Figgy. This would fulfill our needs, from what I can see. To be clear, the arks to reconcile report should only include completed open visibility items for this purpose (see comment from @escowles above).

kelea99 commented 3 years ago

After a conversation with @kevinreiss and @mzelesky, a sn@p ticket was created for them/ for this request. Ticket number: INC0301083 Short description: arks added to 856 Opened by: Kimberly Leaman on September 28, 2020 at 2:31 PM Affected user: Kimberly Leaman

Request: As per Mark Zelesky's request, I am making a ticket for this. We would like arks added to the 856 field in the MARC record and I provide here the original github ticket, which also includes a link of the arks to reconcile. Thank you so much and please let me know if you have questions or need something more from me. Kim https://github.com/pulibrary/figgy/issues/4240