I agree with everything Kevin and Jordan have said. I’d add one additional advantage to using the Repository Processing Note.
When the PUI is implemented, as we are currently working through, it becomes crucial to manage the workflow around published vs. unpublished notes (and components). We anticipate relying heavily on the “Publish All” button at the resource level. Using the Repository Processing Note means there is one less note that could be accidentally published with Publish All. Mike From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jordon Steele Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2018 4:40 PM To: Archivesspace Users Group <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Processing notes Christie, Like Kevin, we use this note to communicate administrative information that doesn’t need to be published but ought to be conveyed to staff, especially if it’s information that doesn’t neatly align with a specific note that could be unpublished. For example, I used it to explain to staff why we decided to change the identifier of a collection from one normally reserved for manuscript collections to one that we use for university records collections. The idea is that having information like this in the Repository Processing Note ensures that it’s more likely to be seen by staff than having it buried in, say, a more specific note that’s marked “unpublished.” Best, Jordon Jordon Steele Hodson Curator of the University Archives Special Collections The Sheridan Libraries Johns Hopkins University 3400 N Charles St Baltimore, MD 21218 410-516-5493 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kevin Clair Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2018 4:34 PM To: Archivesspace Users Group <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Processing notes Hi Christie, At the University of Denver we use it in both Resource and Archival Object records as a note to other archivists indicating processing or cataloging tasks that were left unfinished for one reason or another, or other administrative things that we don’t want published in the PUI. The idea is that if the actions listed in the Repository Processing Note get taken, we remove the text that’s there. We have a report that pulls the information from that field for review that we run periodically when setting processing priorities: https://github.com/duspeccoll/archivesspace_reports/tree/master/resources/resource_processing_notes_report<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_duspeccoll_archivesspace-5Freports_tree_master_resources_resource-5Fprocessing-5Fnotes-5Freport&d=DwMGaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=fWPDMLxJ1Hpw4R8oN7OV0U6P4Nt_f5o8aUkXaby3nOY&m=gMxspNQHg5oFkrzgTER6dpY45b3cCvyB6tUrmXEoENI&s=f01SKcBsrjNU9f_FAo957_JSQzctEcXpMYANZNg3H6Q&e=> -k From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Christie Peterson Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2018 2:28 PM To: Archivesspace Users Group Subject: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Processing notes Hello, Can anyone on this list speak to what was intended to go in the "Repository Processing Note" text field for Resources, which the tooltip tells me does not appear in any exports or reports? Can anyone give me a use case for why they populate this field in addition to (or instead of?) an unpublished "Processing Information" note? Thanks, Christie Peterson -- ❄️ ❄️ ❄️ ❄️ ❄️ ❄️ ❄️ ❄️ Christie S. Peterson Head of Technical Services for Special Collections Smith College Northampton, Mass. 413-585-2996 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> pronouns: she/her/hers
_______________________________________________ Archivesspace_Users_Group mailing list [email protected] http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/mailman/listinfo/archivesspace_users_group
