Conditional-Reply-Extension

Summary of the proposal and discussions at the Dublin meeting and online

1             Discussion at IPIG in Dublin:

Problem with using Conditional-Reply for bad citation

The problem: AnswerReason = “not found as cited” is not allowable for Answer:Conditional.  ItemId not allowable in Conditional-Reply.

Kerry: Currently we say Answer:Unfilled and trap that at the Requester so we can send a new request with corrected item details.

Dave:  Add ItemId as part of an external to ConditionalReply.

Kerry: Add ‘Not found as cited’ and ‘Insufficient citation’ to AnswerReasons:Conditional.

Dave: RLG will develop the appropriate extension - and the additional enumerations will be profiled.

Content of new ItemId will replace original content of ItemId at both requester and responder.

These Profile Amendments need to be fast-tracked and get into a new version of the profile (September).

2             Linda Driver's Proposal of 26 April 2002

2.1        Create new object:

Name: IPIG-Conditional-Reply-Extension

 

Object identifier:                       1.0.10161.13.X

Submitting organization:           Linda Driver for ILL Protocol Implementors Group

Date Submitted:                         26 April 2002

Date of Registration:

 

Usage:

This external object is used in the conditional-reply-extensions field of the Conditional-Reply message to carry information requested by the responder in the ILL-Answer.Conditional-Results message. The external object is designed to be used in those cases where the responder sends the conditions:

        lacks-copyright-compliance (16)

        not-found-as-cited  (17)  – newly defined for Conditional-Results.conditions

 

ASN.1 Specification:

IPIG-Conditional-Reply-Extension DEFINITIONS ::=

-- the object identifier for this extension,

-- registered with the Interlibrary Loan Application

-– Standards Maintenance Agency, is 1.0.10161.13.10

 

BEGIN

 

IMPORTS ILL-String, Item-Id, Medium-Type FROM ISO-10161-ILL-1;

 

IPIG-Conditional-Reply-Extension ::= SEQUENCE {

 

   item-id               [0]  IMPLICIT Item-Id OPTIONAL,

   copyright-compliance  [1]  ILL-String OPTIONAL

}

 

END

 

2.2        Add to Guidelines for ILL Protocol Implementors:

2.2.1       Insert as Guidelines 6.4.2  

CONDITIONAL.REPLY

Suppliers frequently use ILL-ANSWER.Conditional-Results with the following conditions:

·        lacks-copyright-compliance

·        other

indicates that the citation is either incorrect or incomplete, e.g. volume/issue or some other significant piece of information is missing

The Conditional-Reply message allows the requester to indicate yes or no, plus a note. The missing information must be included in the free-text note field, which is an ILL-String.

In legacy system interactions, the legacy user would normally fill out the missing fields in the request form and then answer "yes" to the conditional.  The Conditional-Reply message is sent to the ISO ILL supplier with only the answer "yes" and no other information (unless the legacy system added the new information to the note field).

In peer-to-peer interactions, it is clear that the additional information must be placed in the note field, but the data is not structured and therefore cannot be used to update the correct fields in the request record, such as volume-issue, pagination, copyright-compliance, etc.  As a result, printed products, such as pick slips, mostly likely will not have the information in the normal location and users may need to search through the notes to find the data; or, in the case of lacks-copyright-compliance, the copyright-compliance report may be affected.

The IPIG-Conditional-Reply-Extension {1 0 10161 13 10} is designed to allow the requesting system to answer an ILL-Answer.Conditional-Results message with the appropriate structured answer, so that the responding system can update the original request as appropriate.

Conditional-Results.conditions currently provides “lacks-copyright-compliance” as one of the conditions requiring more than a yes/no answer.  It is recommended that one other condition be supported to handle those cases where the supplying library needs clarification about a citation:

not-found-as-cited (17)

Not-found-as-cited would be used in those cases where “the item identification information is believed by the responder to be either incomplete or incorrect.”  (Definition from ISO 10161-1, Section 3.6.97.)

[NOTE from Maintenance Agency:  The addition of this value requires an amendment to the Protocol, and cannot be handled just as a note in the Guidelines.]

2.2.2       Insert as Guidelines 7.4.7 

{1 0 10161 13 10} IPIG-Conditional-Reply-Extension

Use in the -extensions parameter in CONDITIONAL-REPLY to provide the requesting system to answer an ILL-ANSWER.Conditional-Results message with the appropriate structured answer, so that the responding system can update the original request as appropriate.

ILL ASMA Register Entry of this object: <http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/iso/ill/regi13-10.html>

ASCII text of ASN.1 coding for this object: <http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/iso/ill/document/register/13_10.txt>

3             Discussion of proposed object:

3.1        Need identified in White Paper

The Requester cannot now resend/update initial coded REQUEST information in response to negotiations between the Responder and the Requester to change the terms of supply. 

For example, the Requester requests a Loan but the Responder can supply a Copy only.

Suggestion:  Enhance the CONDITIONAL-REPLY APDU with answer=Yes to allow updating of the REQUEST information.

-- stated by Kerry Blinco, in the White Paper prepared by the Support for Automation group

3.2        Discussion on the List

The messages are arranged in chronological order, starting with the posting of the external object and suggested guidelines by Linda Driver on 26 April and finishing with Ed Davidson's comments on 5 June.

3.2.1       Use RETRY:

Kevin Gladwell:  BL sends an ILL-ANSWER.results-explanation.[2]retry-results.reason-not-available = not-found-as-cited

Ed Davidson:  Using RETRY more closely models what is happening in reality than CONDITIONAL REPLY

Responder is saying:  "Try sending this request again with better defined bib details."

3.2.2       Manipulating Statistics: 

Kerry Blinco:  Users do not want to treat an update of the citation as a new request.  …Treating it as a new request "messes up their statistics".

When using CONDITIONAL REPLY, the original request and the conditional reply appear as one single transaction.

When using RETRY, the original REQUEST and the RETRY appear as separate transactions.  This increases the number of apparently unsatisfied requests.

An application should treat the original REQUEST and RETRY as a single transaction if the Retry-Flag is set to Yes and two Protocol transactions have a common RequesterId +TGQ.

3.2.3       Conditional-Reply-Extension:

Linda Driver:  ILL lenders don't want to say "no" in the case of an incomplete or inaccurate citation.  Typical practice is to send a conditional answer.

Mark Needleman:  …of the opinion that using CONDITIONAL makes sense – what you are saying is "I might be able to supply this to you if you can tell me more about it" – where RETRY seems to imply by its definition that the item is definitely not available at the current time.

Note from BAS:  But, Mark, the Retry-Results includes a value for "not-found-as-cited", saying "I might be able to supply this to you if you can tell me more about it" while the Conditional-Results does not.

Kerry Blinco:  Users are used to handling conditionals; applications are well designed for managing workflow for conditionals.  To find a retry with a certain condition is an additional step in workflow that they do not want to manage.

Kerry Blinco:  Some (poorly designed?) applications assume that something that results in a status of Not Supplied automatically means "pass this request on to the next responder on the rota"  This encourages users to use "conditional" under this scenario rather than the perfectly valid RETRY.

Barbara Shuh:  The use of this extension changes the essence of the CONDITIONAL-REPLY.  Currently, when the responder sends a "conditional" ILL-ANSWER, it implies that the responder has the item and will send it if the condition is accepted (and a CONDITIONAL-REPLY with the answer "Yes" is returned.)

Conditional-Reply-Extension duplicates information already provided for in the ILL-REQUEST.  Is it desirable / necessary to do this?

Conditional-Reply-Extension adds an additional way for the Requester to provide bibliographic information and handle the request

Lyse Perusse:  I do not think that the protocol should integrate not so logical practices that have evolved over the years simply because it was easier to do things that way with the means we had.

Barb Shuh:  Protocol Transaction does not equal Local Application Transaction.  Work on the 3rd edition of the protocol further separates "protocol transactions" from "local application transactions".

Kerry Blinco: Agree that we should keep the integrity of the protocol and encourage applications to help the user manage this situation easily

3.2.4       Restating the requirement: 

Barb Shuh:  What is really required here?  Can we restate the requirements, rather than proposing a solution?

Kerry Blinco:  What I really require from the application is:

(1) please don't send this request to the next responder without a person saying so

(2) please alert a person in some way that is consistent with the way a conditional is handled in the interface, that there is a problem with this request

(3) allow the user to update the request and decide whether to retry the responder that suggested retry or someone else.

4             Guidelines must be based on Protocol and IPIG Profile

Although text has been provided for the Guidelines, there is no documentation in the Protocol or in the IPIG Profile on which to base the guideline.  If these are approved by the Group, then guidelines can be formulated.

·        A protocol amendment:  note that, although the value not-found-as-cited is used in other enumerated lists, it is not a valid value for the enumerated list, Conditional-Results.conditions.  And we can't just pick up a value from another enumerated list and stick it in by adding a note in the Guidelines.  Unfortunately, this requires an amendment to the Protocol.  And this has to be processed before anything else can proceed.

·        Amendment to the IPIG Profile:  The IPIG Profile needs a statement of how IPIG Implementors are to use an object, once the group has agreed on its use.  Text for the Guidelines must be based on the decisions made and recorded in the Profile.