jermnelson
commented
1 year ago This problem occurs because of how the folio_migration_tools parses the Holding Mapping rule for the 852 entity field. Our current Holdings Mapping Rule for the 852 looks like this:
[{'entity': [{'description': 'Public note',
'rules': [{'conditions': [{'type': 'remove_ending_punc, trim'}]}],
'subfield': ['z'],
'target': 'holdingsStatements.note'},
{'applyRulesOnConcatenatedData': True,
'description': 'Holdings note type id',
'rules': [{'conditions': [{'parameter': {'name': 'Note'},
'type': 'set_holdings_note_type_id'}]}],
'subfield': ['x'],
'target': 'notes.holdingsNoteTypeId'},
{'applyRulesOnConcatenatedData': True,
'description': 'Note',
'rules': [{'conditions': [{'type': 'trim'}]}],
'subFieldDelimiter': [{'subfields': ['x'], 'value': ' ; '}],
'subfield': ['x'],
'target': 'notes.note'},
{'applyRulesOnConcatenatedData': True,
'description': 'If true, determines that the note should not be '
'visible for others than staff',
'rules': [{'conditions': [], 'value': 'true'}],
'subfield': ['x'],
'target': 'notes.staffOnly'},
{'description': 'Call number type, defined by 1st indicator',
'rules': [{'conditions': [{'type': 'set_call_number_type_id'}]}],
'subfield': [],
'target': 'callNumberTypeId'},
{'applyRulesOnConcatenatedData': True,
'description': 'The permanent shelving location',
'rules': [{'conditions': [{'type': 'set_permanent_location_id'}]}],
'subfield': ['b', 'c'],
'target': 'permanentLocationId'},
{'applyRulesOnConcatenatedData': True,
'description': 'Call Number identifier',
'subFieldDelimiter': [{'subfields': ['h', 'i'], 'value': ' '}],
'subfield': ['h', 'i'],
'target': 'callNumber'},
{'description': 'Prefix of the call number',
'subfield': ['k'],
'target': 'callNumberPrefix'},
{'description': 'Shelving form of title',
'subfield': ['l'],
'target': 'shelvingTitle'},
{'description': 'Suffix of the call number',
'subfield': ['m'],
'target': 'callNumberSuffix'},
{'description': 'Range of numbers for copies that have the same '
'location',
'subfield': ['t'],
'target': 'copyNumber'}]}]For this rule, the folio_migration_tools takes the first entity row to determine what Holdings Property to apply in this case the holdingsStatement. What we want instead is to use the notes property. Changing the order of these rules does create the proper note property for the Holding but may have other implications for different 852 fields in other MHLD MARC records.
ahafele
The 852$x is mapped to a Holdings staff only note - see https://folio.stanford.edu/inventory/view/c38590d6-6491-5825-a323-a5e75484e59d/3fb73d0[…]d83-9a97-765459ba0ab4?qindex=hrid&query=a5499674&sort=title. For this record I modified the MARC, saved, and therefore sent back through mapping.
But on migration the 852$x is going to a holdings statement Public note - https://folio.stanford.edu/inventory/view/c6740076-a9fb-52d0-828a-df02261862c8/6613a9ea-bc51-519a-9910-17f2c3f06a77?query=a5487807&sort=title (edited)