We have such issues at the ROM, and have two approaches. For a group of fields 
we call "Output fields," which are used for such things as gallery labels, our 
"maker" field will include such things as artist(s), including dates if some 
people like that in their output, or manufacturers, or schools, or 
cultural-ethnographic groups, like band of origin, for example. It is the 
"lumping" who made it field - distinct from chronological-specific cultural 
designations which we put under a "Period" output field. No, really, it works. 
For what we call our "Data fields" we break everything down to very specific 
entries, with very specific fields. It's a long list. This involves some degree 
of duplication at times, but it is the only way to have data we can manipulate, 
and have output that makes sense across a variety of disciplines.
 
R.
 
 
_____________________________________________
Dr. Robert B. J. Mason (E-mail: robert.mason at rom.on.ca; fax (416) 586-5877)
Dept of World Cultures, Royal Ontario Museum, 100 Queen's Park, Toronto, 
Ontario, M5S 2C6, CANADA
Associate Professor, Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations, University of 
Toronto, 4 Bancroft Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 1C1, CANADA
web: http://www.utoronto.ca/nmc/mason/mason.html 

>>> Cheryl Klimaszewski <cklimaszew at brynmawr.edu> 6/3/2009 4:05 PM >>>
I'm writing from the Bryn Mawr College Art and Artifacts Collection, where we 
have recently completed our initial migration of data from a disparate 
collection of Access databases to a formal collections management database. 
Ours is a diverse study collection that includes archaeological and 
anthropological artifacts as well as fine arts objects.  We're wondering how 
other collections are dealing with cataloging culture and nationality 
information for objects that have cultural groups as makers as opposed to 
individual, known makers (also, where the cultural group may or may not always 
correspond to the same geographical region).  Our concerns mainly center around 
objects of African and Native American origin.

Though we're most specifically interested in how this data is stored in the 
cataloging system (i.e. Is the culture/nationality of the object entered into a 
designated "culture/nationality" field? Is an artist/creator record created for 
the entire cultural group? etc.), any general comments on cataloging 
anthropological and archaeological collections are also welcome. If anyone has 
a perspective on this that they would like to share, even if it's of the "Oh my 
god, whatever you do, just don't do it this way" variety, we'd certainly 
appreciate it.

Good wishes,
Cheryl
-- 
Cheryl Klimaszewski
Collections Information Manager
Bryn Mawr College
101 North Merion Avenue
Bryn Mawr, PA 19010
office 610-526-5093
cklimaszew at brynmawr.edu 

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu 

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l 

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://toronto.mediatrope.com/pipermail/mcn-l/

Reply via email to