This looks like a great place to plug "social tagging," (an approach to 
"folksonomy," i.e., using popular terminology for subject 
categorization) like what STEVE (http://steve.museum) promises. 
Folksonomies are a way to address the reality that Museum and Library 
professionals often use subject categorizations that don't reflect the 
terms most people use when searching online. STEVE is an open-source 
tool for enabling social tagging of museum object images to create 
folksonomies.

Alongside the folksonomies, I still think it's worthwhile for museums to 
make their internal subject terms more public. Exposing the insides of 
the Museum in a demystifying, educational way is a great 
community-minded thing to do.

Deborah Wythe wrote:

> This doesn't make a lot of sense to me--why would museums >not< 
> publish subject terms in their web/public versions of the catalog? 
> Isn't the purpose of creating subjects/keywords to make the 
> collections more accessible --to everyone, not just inhouse users? 
> Museum staff are likely to be looking for a specific object and have 
> key data--title or accession numbers--but members of the public 
> (including picture researchers who might buy our images!) may want to 
> ask a system: "show me all the cats."
>
> Deborah
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: "JanaH" <[email protected]>
> Reply-To: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: subject & keyword searching in CMS and DAMS
> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 16:04:12 -0600
>
> Deborah,
>
> Museums don't always publish their subject cataloging to their websites.
> Usually only select fields are exported from the collection management
> system, and for several reasons, the subject fields don't make the cut.
> I think you'll find that the depth of information stored in collection
> management systems isn't really reflected in museum websites. So I guess
> what I'm saying is that just because you don't see it on the Web doesn't
> mean someone isn't recording that information.
>
> That said, I think most of us probably use a vocabulary based on the
> Getty Art & Architecture Thesaurus (AAT), with local terms added where
> necessary. We don't use LCSH because they are usually too
> conceptual/vague for our needs, but maybe someone else will weigh in on
> that?
>
>
> Jana Hill
> Collection Database Coordinator
> Amon Carter Museum
> 3501 Camp Bowie Blvd.
> Fort Worth, Texas 76107
> 817-989-5173
> 817-989-5179 fax
>
> All opinions are my own and not those of my employer.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Deborah Wythe [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 2:12 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: subject & keyword searching in CMS and DAMS
>
> I'm curious to know if your museum assigns formal subject headings
> and/or
> keywords to works of art in their collections management or digital
> asset
> management systems. A little poking around on the Web seems to indicate
> it's
> not too common -- artist name, title, medium, collection, maybe a
> general
> category, yes, but something approaching the depth of the subject
> headings
> used in library catalogs--maybe no?
>
> If you do assign subject headings, which authorities are used -- LCSH?
> AAT?
>
> Thanks,
> Deborah
>
> Deborah Wythe
> Brooklyn Museum
> Head, Digital Collections and Services
> 200 Eastern Parkway
> Brooklyn, NY 11238
> tel: 718 501 6311
> fax: 718 501 6125
> email: [email protected]
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> 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]
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
> [email protected]


"matt 1.vcf" (missing attachment)
---
You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[email protected]

Reply via email to