00:04:23	Thomas Trutt:	You sound nice and clear on this end
00:06:44	Jennifer Eustis:	Alvaro is on his way
00:07:59	Jennifer Eustis:	https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Z1v1RpHBkqtS-LYODQwPbVFReDMzq5C9/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=111366641921831392647&rtpof=true&sd=true
00:12:21	Jana Freytag:	Hi all, sorry for being late, I had PC Trouble
00:20:19	Kristin Martin:	What is the Builde format?
00:20:25	Martin Scholz:	Reacted to "What is the Builde f..." with ➕
00:22:53	Charlotte Whitt:	Are you using Postman to execute the API calls?
00:23:29	Christie Thomas (she/her):	It is the local bibframe schema in use in the linked data app.
00:24:35	Gloria Gonzalez:	Builde is a linked data vocabulary, not a format
00:24:51	Martin Scholz:	Reacted to "Builde is a linked d..." with 💡
00:25:04	Gloria Gonzalez:	You can learn more here https://bibfra.me/
00:25:28	Charlotte Whitt:	Reacted to "You can learn more h..." with 👍
00:26:47	Charlotte Whitt:	Will there be a check - maybe in the Linked Data app - to avoid import of duplicate records?
00:26:54	Christie Thomas (she/her):	Reacted to "You can learn more h..." with 👍
00:29:57	Charlotte Whitt:	:-) Inventory Import is the user interface to mod-inventory-update
00:31:20	Charlotte Whitt:	Replying to "Will there be a chec..."

ah … looks like my question is answered with this slide about Overlap management rules
00:34:43	Thomas Trutt:	If the fingerprint fields are configurable, could you use something like HRID?
00:36:00	Tod Olson:	Also, thinking about the Five Colleges question, if fingerprint fields are configurable, could you use a local field for which library in a consortium uses it?
00:36:08	Brooks Travis:	Isn’t this intended to be an interface for external systems to interface with FOLIO and provide Linked Data?
00:36:25	Huff, Jeremy T:	Replying to "Isn’t this intended ..."

That was not the impression that I got
00:36:39	Jennifer Eustis:	Replying to "Also, thinking about..."

Not sure. Though we are very far off from switching to linked data :)
00:36:45	Martin Scholz:	Replying to "Isn’t this intended ..."

I got same imperssion as Brooks...
00:38:19	Kristin Martin:	When we talk about things, are we saying that SRS=only MARC, and other data types would be stored in something else?
00:39:05	Thomas Trutt:	Replying to "Also, thinking about..."

Same, but HRID may be a path, that’s why I was asking..
00:39:18	Gloria Gonzalez:	Yes Kristin, that’s right. Linked data is stored in Data Graph storage, which you can think of as a parallel schema to Inventory.
00:39:19	Jennifer Eustis:	Replying to "When we talk about t..."

srs should be open to other encoding schemes like ead, linked data, etc.
00:39:40	Martin Scholz:	Replying to "When we talk about t..."

is it?
00:39:53	Gloria Gonzalez:	Reacted to "Also, thinking about…" with 👍
00:40:12	Christie Thomas (she/her):	Replying to "When we talk about t..."

No. Or not yet. I am not sure there is any real roadmap to expanding srs.
00:40:20	Kristin Martin:	Replying to "When we talk about t..."

but it sounds like now, SRS=MARC storage, and Data Graph storage=link data storage. I feel like this is different from what I had original thought.
00:40:42	Kristin Martin:	Now Data Import=MARC Data Import
00:41:02	Jennifer Eustis:	Replying to "Now Data Import=MARC..."

We are looking at non marc ways for DI
00:41:21	Christie Thomas (she/her):	Replying to "Now Data Import=MARC..."

That is correct for now. I would like to see a larger conversation about what is necessary given how development is actually happening.
00:41:21	Gloria Gonzalez:	Replying to "Isn’t this intended …"
The approach was designed for system admins but yes it can also be integrated with external systems.
00:41:39	Tod Olson:	Replying to "When we talk about t..."

The workflow presented was Linked Data being stored in the Graph DB, converted to MARC, and that MARC goes to Inventory and then to SRS. So even if SRS stores, say, EAD or DC, one might still not want the derived MARC going to SRS.
00:41:41	Gloria Gonzalez:	Reacted to "Now Data Import=MARC…" with 👍
00:41:44	Christie Thomas (she/her):	Replying to "Now Data Import=MARC..."

Maybe this is a conversation for a wolf con session?
00:42:06	Huff, Jeremy T:	Reacted to "Maybe this is a conv..." with 💯
00:42:27	Christie Thomas (she/her):	Reacted to "The workflow present..." with 👍
00:42:42	Martin Scholz:	I always wondered why one says that Folio is modular but then have one app for importing into all other apps, and potentially creating a lot of dependencies...
00:43:02	Kristin Martin:	Reacted to "Maybe this is a conv..." with 💯
00:44:17	Thomas Trutt:	That has been my vision. Is that DI is a simple one format only import tool, then other tools link into it that reformat data to the proper format.
00:44:54	Christie Thomas (she/her):	What Jennifer said. Also, we cannot keep pointing to data import as a solution when it is not set up to deliver. The vision does not align with the reality. Individual import tools iarethe only solution for making progress right now.
00:46:51	Martin Scholz:	Reacted to "What Jennifer said. ..." with ➕
00:47:24	Jennifer Eustis:	Reacted to "What Jennifer said. ..." with ➕
00:49:00	Martin Scholz:	Replying to "What Jennifer said. ..."

I wonder what would be the advantage of a single general-purpose import app over several specific ones
00:51:37	Thomas Trutt:	Replying to "What Jennifer said. ..."

There may not be. My idea was that the DI app took let’s say JSON. It was responsible for apply the changes, logging, batching jobs etc. The other apps would inject raw data and format to the JSON needed by DI. It may be a to simplified vision.
00:54:24	Alvaro Lopez Bustamante:	here's the presentation link: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1S51k2R66qcpsK7bI-rTnCD9fN2fqKUxR/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=105686150222488070986&rtpof=true&sd=true
00:54:29	Alexis Manheim:	Reacted to "here's the presentat..." with 👍
00:54:45	Charlotte Whitt:	Reacted to "srs should be open t..." with 👍
00:55:07	Charlotte Whitt:	Reacted to "The workflow present..." with 👍
00:55:10	Thomas Trutt:	Reacted to "here's the presentat..." with ❤️
00:55:20	Charlotte Whitt:	Reacted to "Now Data Import=MARC..." with 👍
00:55:28	Charlotte Whitt:	Reacted to "Maybe this is a conv..." with 💯
00:56:48	Charlotte Whitt:	Maybe a lot of confusion could be addressed if Data Import is renamed to MARC SRS Import?
00:57:34	Tod Olson:	I sort of thing one central app vs several specific isn't really the question. Under the hood, it will inevitably be separate processing streams that have intimate knowledge of the formats, their storage, and links to other information in FOLIO. That could one exposed in different ways. 
The central question is how do the different formats co-exist in the overall system and how do the import, export, and other processing coordinate.
00:58:31	Christie Thomas (she/her):	Replying to "What Jennifer said. ..."

If we decide that it is only in for importing MARC data. Right now we use MARC to import all kinds of Inventory data as a workaround and there are still gaps that are not met by the other import apps coming up.
00:58:48	Jennifer Eustis:	Reacted to "If we decide that it..." with 💯
00:59:22	Jennifer Eustis:	Replying to "What Jennifer said. ..."

We have on our implementers' topic, using csv's to update/create holdings or items
01:00:29	Christie Thomas (she/her):	Replying to "What Jennifer said. ..."

Although maybe we need a with multiple import tools … MARC import tools, csv import tools EDI import tools, etc.
01:00:52	Christie Thomas (she/her):	Replying to "What Jennifer said. ..."

And then we have harvesters which are being collected together under the import umbrella…
01:00:55	Jennifer Eustis:	Replying to "What Jennifer said. ..."

We always forget that DI currently does 2 formats: EDI and MARC
01:01:01	Christie Thomas (she/her):	Reacted to "We always forget tha..." with 👍
01:01:06	Charlotte Whitt:	Reacted to "We always forget tha..." with 👍
01:01:13	Tod Olson:	Reacted to "here's the presentat..." with ❤️
01:01:54	Gloria Gonzalez:	Thanks everyone!!