...
- Is the retention byte (008/12) going to be updated also?
If we are able, we should do so at this time.
- Are the ReCAP commitment for specific items owned at that time, or are new acquisitions (such as subsequently received issues of the same journal) also going to be committed?
This will happen for ongoing items, both new acquisitions and other portions of the catalog. Eliz will check with Columbia on how they do this.
- Whose responsibility is it to develop/document/communicate policies and workflows on manual creation, maintenance, etc to make sure conflicts in coding don’t develop in future?
CCDSC and ADSC should charge a group to work through these tasks. ITS will draft and send to Metadata Standards. Eliz will send out launch communication to hlcomms. Laura will clean up page and send to Eliz a few days prior to starting mass updates.
- Is there contention between previously entered 583 fields and current fields? This needs analysis once records have been updated.
Can the CCDSC survey be extended to determine where collections may have been marked in the past to inform planning moving forward? Laura will request this of CCDSC.
- Are there other retention commitment scenarios, shared or local, that we need to accommodate in our use of these item and holdings fields?
See above.
- What is the intended workflow for items that are marked lost or missing or damaged? Do these need to be sent to collection development staff?
This should go to CCDSC and ADSC for discussion. Laura will send them a note.
- Is work on this a higher priority than Google scanning processing or the creation of the metadata file for Ivies Plus?
This is more important that Google scanning processing as this is blocking the de-dupe of HD project.
- What is the workflow to use is a committed item is replaced with a new copy (for lost or damaged items)?
...