2014-07-31 Meeting Notes AWG

2014-07-31 Meeting Notes AWG

Date

31 July 2014

Attendees

  • @Jessica Wesley Meyerson

  • @Esther E Kirchner

  • @Paloma Graciani Picardo

  • @Stephanie Malmros

  • @Beth Dodd

  • @Katie Pierce Meyer

  • @Christian D Kelleher

  • @Theresa Polk

  • @Jennifer Lee

  • @Benn Chang

  • @Wendy Martin

  • @Ladd Hanson

  • @Henry V Henriksen

  • @Melanie Cofield

  • @Anna Lamphear

  • @Evan Hocker

  • @Donna J Coates

  • @Hightower-Coyle, Maryrose

  • @Hilkin, Elizabeth E

  • @Stulgaityte, Evelina

  • @Amy Bowman

  • @William Wentzell

Agenda

  • Discussing workflows for archival description @Esther E Kirchner

  • AtoM Demo @Esther E Kirchner

  • Discussing AtoM and how other archivists on campus feel about the tool in relation to their current archival description workflow

  • Import options - accession record - what do we do with legacy accession numbers

  • Dumbarton Oaks - Anne-Marie Viola (she shared the evaluation documents listed below. Note that the "Highlights" spreadsheet has multiple tabs)

Demo/discussion Items

Item

Who

Notes

Item

Who

Notes

Current practice at BCAH

Esther

pulling together accession records (FMP database) and lots of other data from distributed materials/locations (Word docs, etc.) > processing > finding aid > TARO > MARC

How could AtoM help streamline current practice?

Esther, Jessica

  • manage accession records, & use them to create archival descriptions (centralized, linked data)

  • display standards in help text for fields (currently DACS, could be customized for our local needs)

  • customizable taxonomies, system saves previously entered subject terms, auto-suggests during data entry

  • manage and link to container list (although not searchable)

  • provide visual reference via digital object links (single or set)

  • export to EAD with one click (although issues with stylesheet & validation need to be worked out)

  • granular permissions and workflow settings to accommodate items in progress/not yet published.

Issues observed

Esther

  • field requirements not currently enforced

  • sequence of adding series & sub series is not intuitive if you want nesting … series and sub-series fields are same as collection level, which is not typically needed

  • accession number field value generated by system - how to deal with legacy records/numbers?

AtoM development model and user community

Jessica

Canadian company Artefactual's model is similar Drupal community (open source software freely available for deployment, but you can contract with company for customizations, support, hosting; new features are integrated into subsequent releases of the software).

Dunbarton Oaks, a DC repository affiliated with Harvard has been using AtoM for awhile: relatively small set of data for migration; positive experience with tech support/forum; contracting for image cataloging tool/VRA core module

SAA AtoM interest group is in the works

Recommendation that we compile our questions and post them to the forum so that the wider community benefits from the answers/convo

Questions for our group

Jessica, Amy B.

  • How would AtoM use align with the TARO planning grant?

    • Amy said grant plans include more defined standards, and will include EAD 3 release - these should probably be settled before an implementation of AtoM

  • What would legacy finding aid migration to AtoM look like among our group?

    • Amy asked about importing from Excel or Word files and whether container level structure expressed in formatting will translate to AtoM (AtoM accepts csv imports, so preliminary conversion would be required.)

    • Planning to import from a wide variety of doc formats would be crucial

    • Jessica suggested breaking existing practice into two streams: 1) new workflow for new activities, and 2) legacy migration. Each unit's needs will be different.

 

Current processing workflow vs. ICA-Atom

A written description of our current LA1 workflow is available Here

Current LA1 workflow flowchart:

Library Assistant One workflow
Library Assistant One workflow

Current Briscoe workflow for processing archival collections:

Stage

Current Process

Platform/media

Can AtoM Do This?

Stage

Current Process

Platform/media

Can AtoM Do This?

Preprocessing

Accession Records Database

Filemaker

YES*

 

Check Finding Aid Master

Server

MAYBE unnecessary

 

Check TARO and UT Catalog

Web

unnecessary

 

Check Holding record

Paper

NO

Processing

Deaccessioning/Separation/Destruction sheets

Paper

NO

 

Shelflist

Server

YES*

 

Finding Aid Template

Word

YES

 

Indexes (Sources: LCSH and UT Cat.)

Web

YES*

 

Inventory

Excel

YES

 

* If addition:

 

 

 

Update finding aid in masters

Server

MAYBE unnecessary

EAD

* If new:

 

 

 

Get TARO ID from from TARO register

Paper

MAYBE

 

Encode EAD

Oxygen

YES*

 

Upload to TARO

Fetch

NO

 

If addition:

 

 

 

Download EAD from TARO

Fetch

unnecessary

 

Update EAD

Oxygen

YES

 

Upload to TARO

Fetch

NO

MARC

* If new:

 

 

 

Switch to Windows partition

O.S.

unnecessary?

 

Download EAD from TARO

Web

unnecessary

 

EAD to MARC

MARC Edit

MAYBE

 

Upload and finish in OCLC

OCLC Connexion

NO

 

Check record in Sierra

Sierra

NO

 

Update EAD with OCLC #

Oxygen

YES*

 

Upload EAD to TARO

Fetch

NO

 

* If addition:

 

 

 

Update using Sierra

Sierra

NO

Wrapping Up

File holding record

Paper

NO

 

Print copy of finding aid for reading room

Paper

NO

AtoM scenario workflow:

Top Atom customization requests:

Section

Fix needed

Estimated difficulty

Priority

Section

Fix needed

Estimated difficulty

Priority

EAD EXPORT

EAD export needs to use our TARO stylesheet. Also, current output doesn't necessarily validate.

Low

High

ACCESSIONS

Accession record numbering is automated and doesn't adhere to our numbering system-can the number field be made editable?

Medium

High

PHYSICAL STORAGE

If under "Manage Physical Storage" we could add searchable information such as "3 in. space for photos" or "Shelf space for 3 oversize boxes," we could replace our current shelflist with Atom

High

High

ACCESSIONS

Archival descriptions must be linked to accession records upon creation. You can't link descriptions to accessions after the fact.

Medium

Medium

ARCHIVAL DESCRIPTION

Scope notes that appear on the data entry fields are not terribly helpful. Can this text be customized?

Medium

Medium

ARCHIVAL DESCRIPTION

Every child level of arrangement has the same data entry fields. Can this be streamlined and duplicative fields removed?

Medium

Medium

ARCHIVAL DESCRIPTION

Each level in the hierarchy demands a unique identifier, but the uniqueness isn't enforced. Similarly, "required fields" aren't actually enforced.

Medium

Low

EAD EXPORT

Some kind of preview/print functionality within Atom would be nice so that we can spot errors before uploading our files to TARO.

High

Low

ARCHIVAL DESCRIPTION

There isn't a one to one relationship between some Atom fields and TARO template. Where do we enter OCLC # and preferred citation? Can those fields be added to Atom?

Medium

Low

MARC EXPORT

A feature that allows mapping the Archival Description into a MARC record is not a priority, but could be an eventual nice addition.

High

Low

Action Items

accession record pilot - CSV import
multiple repository permissions and stylesheets
stylesheets - limited customization (get a copy of the TARO stylesheet)
post examples of AtoM instances