Hi Will, Here in St. Louis we have historically created what we call a group record for the object as a whole using the accession number with full range of parts i.e., 25:1997.1-.15 for a portfolio of prints. This way one can pull the overall record for label copy etc. while still managing each part individually for location, conservation etc.
Cathryn L. Goodwin Information Technologies The Saint Louis Art Museum 1 Fine Arts Drive St. Louis MO 63110 314.655.5349 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Real, Will" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 8:35 AM Subject: Part/Whole Relationships in Museum Collections > I am curious to see if there is any consensus in the museum community > regarding the cataloguing of objects with part/whole relationships. I > realize there are countless permutations of this situation, but the > prototypical example in our institution is a tea set. The tea set contains > various components--teapot, cups/saucers, sugar bowls--which themselves are > composed of parts--the sugar bowl lid and the bowl itself; the cup and its > saucer, the teapot and its stand, etc. > > We are about to implement a new collections management system (KE EMu) and > currently our strategy is as follows: > > 1. Catalogue the various components as individual items--the pot, the bowl, > the cups/saucers, all with unique numbers (2001.2.1, etc.). The components > would be linked to eachother in the database as Related Objects > 2. Catalogue the parts of a component in a Child relationship to that > component's record--the bowl and lid, the cup and saucer, etc., all > designated with letters (2001.2.1.A, etc.) > > We are not sure what to do about the ensemble of all the components--the tea > set as a whole. It currently does not have a catalogue number, but we can > imagine the usefulness of having a record for the set, in a Parent > relationship to each individual component. If we do this, we have to give > the set itself a unique number, or refer to it by the range of numbers it > includes (2001.2.1-10), or employ a totally new (for our institution) > cataloguing level, more like a scope note or folder-level record, as might > be typical in a catalogue of archival material, for example. > > Perhaps this is a query for the AAM Registrar's Committee listserv (is > anyone out there a member who would be willing to post it on my behalf?). > However, if any of you have some ideas on the matter we would be interested > to hear them. > > William Real > Director of Technology Initiatives > Carngie Museum of Art > 412-622-3267 > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: [email protected] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email protected] > --- You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email protected]
