Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

2019-02-14 Thread Hilton, Adrien 
Thanks, everyone! I don’t particularly love thinking about containers this much 
so I appreciate the sage advice.

Best wishes,
Adrien

From: archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org 
 On Behalf Of Rees, 
John (NIH/NLM) [E]
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2019 8:44 AM
To: Archivesspace Users Group 
Subject: Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

We’d describe the sets’ nature in the unittitle and, like others, randomly 
assign volume numbers from 1-N across the entire collection.

We insert Permalife flags in each volume which has the call number, arbitrary 
volume number, and a barcode. We do this for all our rare books holdings and 
books in the archives. It saves on the extra labor and cost of boxing and 
foldering, unless the item’s condition warrants a phase box or some other 
protective enclosure

John


From: Jordon Steele mailto:jste...@jhu.edu>>
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 11:22 PM
To: Archivesspace Users Group 
mailto:archivesspace_users_group@lyralists.lyrasis.org>>
Subject: Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

Maureen,

My feedback assumes Adrien is thinking of these volumes purely as containers 
and not as meaningful representations of the nature of what’s within them. So 
just like there’s nothing inherently meaningful about calling something Box 1, 
there’s nothing inherently meaningful about calling a container  “Volume 1-5 
(1st series).” The latter is a silly label, but it’s just a label.

Given this assumption, I think the reason why I would advocate for keeping the 
confusing, baroque volume labels is three-fold:


  1.  There may be legacy references to them
  2.  Renumbering the volumes with something less baroque would require, like, 
sharpie-ing over the existing numbers, which Jared Sparks would be very grumpy 
about because boy, aren’t those some handsome volumes
  3.  Who cares what the indicators are, they’re just container labels (i.e. 
from an inventory management standpoint they should be tracked with something 
unique like barcodes anyway)

But to your point,hypothetically if the items could be easily removed from the 
volumes, put in folders, and put into boxes, without offending  the ghost of 
Jared Sparks, definitely just number the new containers 1, 2, 3 etc.

Best,

Jordon

Jordon Steele
Hodson Curator of the University Archives
Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
3400 N Charles St
Baltimore, MD 21218
jste...@jhu.edu<mailto:jste...@jhu.edu>
410-516-5493
he/him/his

From: 
archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org<mailto:archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org>
 
mailto:archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org>>
 On Behalf Of Maureen Callahan
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 5:07 PM
To: Archivesspace Users Group 
mailto:archivesspace_users_group@lyralists.lyrasis.org>>
Subject: Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

A different direction!

I've noticed that we often get in trouble when there's a conflation between 
archival/bibliographic description and collection control, particularly because 
those descriptors fundamentally serve different purposes and can even change 
over time -- sometimes at cross purposes. So I would say that your best bet 
would be to think carefully about the purpose the volume number serves. When 
you say that these are in two series, is that a designation made by the 
publisher/author? Or is it just an organizing principle imposed by past 
archivists? Because I think that there are much better ways of saying that 
volumes belong together than using volume numbers, and I also think that 
whenever possible it's best to keep inventory management simple and just number 
widgets seriatim.

MC

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:55 PM Jordon Steele 
mailto:jste...@jhu.edu>> wrote:
I second (third?) the logic that the container indicator should exactly follow 
the volume label on the spine. So container type=Volume, container 
indicator=1-5 (1st series).

This may not work with your workflow, but two additional suggestions:


• Barcode each volume and add the barcodes to the container records so 
that staff can track them as such OR

• Put each volume in a custom box and barcode the box.

Best,

Jordon

Jordon Steele
Hodson Curator of the University Archives
Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
3400 N Charles St
Baltimore, MD 21218
jste...@jhu.edu<mailto:jste...@jhu.edu>
410-516-5493
he/him/his

From: 
archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org<mailto:archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org>
 
mailto:archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org>>
 On Behalf Of Kottman, Miloche
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 1:37 PM
To: Archivesspace Users Group 
mailto:archivesspace_users_group@lyralists.lyrasis.org>>
Subject: Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

I would prefer whatever

Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

2019-02-14 Thread Rees, John (NIH/NLM) [E] 
We’d describe the sets’ nature in the unittitle and, like others, randomly 
assign volume numbers from 1-N across the entire collection.

We insert Permalife flags in each volume which has the call number, arbitrary 
volume number, and a barcode. We do this for all our rare books holdings and 
books in the archives. It saves on the extra labor and cost of boxing and 
foldering, unless the item’s condition warrants a phase box or some other 
protective enclosure

John


From: Jordon Steele 
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 11:22 PM
To: Archivesspace Users Group 
Subject: Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

Maureen,

My feedback assumes Adrien is thinking of these volumes purely as containers 
and not as meaningful representations of the nature of what’s within them. So 
just like there’s nothing inherently meaningful about calling something Box 1, 
there’s nothing inherently meaningful about calling a container  “Volume 1-5 
(1st series).” The latter is a silly label, but it’s just a label.

Given this assumption, I think the reason why I would advocate for keeping the 
confusing, baroque volume labels is three-fold:


1)  There may be legacy references to them

2)  Renumbering the volumes with something less baroque would require, 
like, sharpie-ing over the existing numbers, which Jared Sparks would be very 
grumpy about because boy, aren’t those some handsome volumes

3)  Who cares what the indicators are, they’re just container labels (i.e. 
from an inventory management standpoint they should be tracked with something 
unique like barcodes anyway)

But to your point,hypothetically if the items could be easily removed from the 
volumes, put in folders, and put into boxes, without offending  the ghost of 
Jared Sparks, definitely just number the new containers 1, 2, 3 etc.

Best,

Jordon

Jordon Steele
Hodson Curator of the University Archives
Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
3400 N Charles St
Baltimore, MD 21218
jste...@jhu.edu<mailto:jste...@jhu.edu>
410-516-5493
he/him/his

From: 
archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org<mailto:archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org>
 
mailto:archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org>>
 On Behalf Of Maureen Callahan
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 5:07 PM
To: Archivesspace Users Group 
mailto:archivesspace_users_group@lyralists.lyrasis.org>>
Subject: Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

A different direction!

I've noticed that we often get in trouble when there's a conflation between 
archival/bibliographic description and collection control, particularly because 
those descriptors fundamentally serve different purposes and can even change 
over time -- sometimes at cross purposes. So I would say that your best bet 
would be to think carefully about the purpose the volume number serves. When 
you say that these are in two series, is that a designation made by the 
publisher/author? Or is it just an organizing principle imposed by past 
archivists? Because I think that there are much better ways of saying that 
volumes belong together than using volume numbers, and I also think that 
whenever possible it's best to keep inventory management simple and just number 
widgets seriatim.

MC

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:55 PM Jordon Steele 
mailto:jste...@jhu.edu>> wrote:
I second (third?) the logic that the container indicator should exactly follow 
the volume label on the spine. So container type=Volume, container 
indicator=1-5 (1st series).

This may not work with your workflow, but two additional suggestions:


• Barcode each volume and add the barcodes to the container records so 
that staff can track them as such OR

• Put each volume in a custom box and barcode the box.

Best,

Jordon

Jordon Steele
Hodson Curator of the University Archives
Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
3400 N Charles St
Baltimore, MD 21218
jste...@jhu.edu<mailto:jste...@jhu.edu>
410-516-5493
he/him/his

From: 
archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org<mailto:archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org>
 
mailto:archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org>>
 On Behalf Of Kottman, Miloche
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 1:37 PM
To: Archivesspace Users Group 
mailto:archivesspace_users_group@lyralists.lyrasis.org>>
Subject: Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

I would prefer whatever enumeration had been used to label the pieces to avoid 
confusion for the patron.  For example, if the pieces are labeled v. 1-10 but 
your finding aid has series 1, v. 1-5 and series 2, v. 1-5, the patron is 
likely to be confused if they ask for series 2, v. 1 and get volume 6 when it’s 
paged.

If there’s no label and/or you get to re-label, I recommend using the 
Arrangement note to explain that there are two series with 5 volumes each, e.g.
Series 1, vol.

Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

2019-02-13 Thread Jordon Steele 
Maureen,

My feedback assumes Adrien is thinking of these volumes purely as containers 
and not as meaningful representations of the nature of what’s within them. So 
just like there’s nothing inherently meaningful about calling something Box 1, 
there’s nothing inherently meaningful about calling a container  “Volume 1-5 
(1st series).” The latter is a silly label, but it’s just a label.

Given this assumption, I think the reason why I would advocate for keeping the 
confusing, baroque volume labels is three-fold:


1)  There may be legacy references to them

2)  Renumbering the volumes with something less baroque would require, 
like, sharpie-ing over the existing numbers, which Jared Sparks would be very 
grumpy about because boy, aren’t those some handsome volumes

3)  Who cares what the indicators are, they’re just container labels (i.e. 
from an inventory management standpoint they should be tracked with something 
unique like barcodes anyway)

But to your point,hypothetically if the items could be easily removed from the 
volumes, put in folders, and put into boxes, without offending  the ghost of 
Jared Sparks, definitely just number the new containers 1, 2, 3 etc.

Best,

Jordon

Jordon Steele
Hodson Curator of the University Archives
Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
3400 N Charles St
Baltimore, MD 21218
jste...@jhu.edu<mailto:jste...@jhu.edu>
410-516-5493
he/him/his

From: archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org 
 On Behalf Of Maureen 
Callahan
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 5:07 PM
To: Archivesspace Users Group 
Subject: Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

A different direction!

I've noticed that we often get in trouble when there's a conflation between 
archival/bibliographic description and collection control, particularly because 
those descriptors fundamentally serve different purposes and can even change 
over time -- sometimes at cross purposes. So I would say that your best bet 
would be to think carefully about the purpose the volume number serves. When 
you say that these are in two series, is that a designation made by the 
publisher/author? Or is it just an organizing principle imposed by past 
archivists? Because I think that there are much better ways of saying that 
volumes belong together than using volume numbers, and I also think that 
whenever possible it's best to keep inventory management simple and just number 
widgets seriatim.

MC

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:55 PM Jordon Steele 
mailto:jste...@jhu.edu>> wrote:
I second (third?) the logic that the container indicator should exactly follow 
the volume label on the spine. So container type=Volume, container 
indicator=1-5 (1st series).

This may not work with your workflow, but two additional suggestions:


• Barcode each volume and add the barcodes to the container records so 
that staff can track them as such OR

• Put each volume in a custom box and barcode the box.

Best,

Jordon

Jordon Steele
Hodson Curator of the University Archives
Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
3400 N Charles St
Baltimore, MD 21218
jste...@jhu.edu<mailto:jste...@jhu.edu>
410-516-5493
he/him/his

From: 
archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org<mailto:archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org>
 
mailto:archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org>>
 On Behalf Of Kottman, Miloche
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 1:37 PM
To: Archivesspace Users Group 
mailto:archivesspace_users_group@lyralists.lyrasis.org>>
Subject: Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

I would prefer whatever enumeration had been used to label the pieces to avoid 
confusion for the patron.  For example, if the pieces are labeled v. 1-10 but 
your finding aid has series 1, v. 1-5 and series 2, v. 1-5, the patron is 
likely to be confused if they ask for series 2, v. 1 and get volume 6 when it’s 
paged.

If there’s no label and/or you get to re-label, I recommend using the 
Arrangement note to explain that there are two series with 5 volumes each, e.g.
Series 1, vol. 1-5 shelved as v. 1-5
Series 2, vol. 1-5 shelved as v. 6-10

Then do top containers as v. 1-10

This is similar to what we do in the catalog for serials and monographs, i.e. a 
summary holdings statement followed by actual item records/barcodes for which 
volumes the library holds.

--Miloche Kottman
University of Kansas Libraries

From: 
archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org<mailto:archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org>
 
mailto:archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org>>
 On Behalf Of Hilton, Adrien
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 8:53 AM
To: 
archivesspace_users_group@lyralists.lyrasis.org<mailto:archivesspace_users_group@lyralists.lyrasis.org>
Subject: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

Hi,

I’m in the process of retrospectively adding t

Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

2019-02-13 Thread Larry Weimer 
Hi Adrien,

At New-York Historical Society, we would typically create a top container
for each standalone volume. We would do this in part because our finding
aids integrate with the patron request system (Aeon), making it
straightforward to request and page individual volumes. For the numbering,
we would use whatever system seemed to be appropriate for the volumes at
hand. For a bunch of random volumes, we would just assign them all a number
1, 2, 3, etc. In the Sparks case, we'd likely create a numbering that was a
meaningful identifier for each volume. Could be various forms: Vol. 1.1,
1.2, 1.3 (to indicate 1st series and volume within the series); Vol 1.1,
2.1, 3.1 (the reverse of the first option). Or add an S to emphasize the
fact that one of the numbers represents the series (e.g., Vol 1.1s, 2.1s,
etc. But if referring to the Sparks volumes all together in one top
container (e.g. Vols "1-5.1st" or something) like that provides adequate
control and description in your situation, go for it. Hope that helps!

Larry

Larry Weimer
Head of Archival Processing
New-York Historical Society

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:53 AM Hilton, Adrien 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> I’m in the process of retrospectively adding top containers to all of our
> 800,000+ archival objects. A large number of our collections are in volume
> format, housed on shelves as is, not in boxes. I’m wondering how folks are
> handling these types of “containers” in AS.
>
>
>
> Just for an example, the Jared Sparks papers consists of 10 individual
> volumes, which if these were boxes, of course would be Boxes 1-10. However,
> the material is a two part series, each consisting of 5 volumes each and
> referred to on spines as volumes 1-5 (1st series) and another volumes 1-5
> (2nd series). I’m disinclined to give them top containers Volumes 1-10
> and I don’t want to have two Volume 1 Top Containers in the same
> collection. Any advise on how to make this clear to users and manageable on
> the back end?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Adrien
> ___
> Archivesspace_Users_Group mailing list
> Archivesspace_Users_Group@lyralists.lyrasis.org
> http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/mailman/listinfo/archivesspace_users_group
>

-- 
 
___
Archivesspace_Users_Group mailing list
Archivesspace_Users_Group@lyralists.lyrasis.org
http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/mailman/listinfo/archivesspace_users_group

Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

2019-02-13 Thread Maureen Callahan 
A different direction!

I've noticed that we often get in trouble when there's a conflation between
archival/bibliographic description and collection control, particularly
because those descriptors fundamentally serve different purposes and can
even change over time -- sometimes at cross purposes. So I would say that
your best bet would be to think carefully about the purpose the volume
number serves. When you say that these are in two series, is that a
designation made by the publisher/author? Or is it just an organizing
principle imposed by past archivists? Because I think that there are much
better ways of saying that volumes belong together than using volume
numbers, and I also think that whenever possible it's best to keep
inventory management simple and just number widgets seriatim.

MC

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:55 PM Jordon Steele  wrote:

> I second (third?) the logic that the container indicator should exactly
> follow the volume label on the spine. So container type=Volume, container
> indicator=1-5 (1st series).
>
>
>
> This may not work with your workflow, but two additional suggestions:
>
>
>
> · Barcode each volume and add the barcodes to the container
> records so that staff can track them as such OR
>
> · Put each volume in a custom box and barcode the box.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Jordon
>
>
>
> Jordon Steele
>
> Hodson Curator of the University Archives
>
> Sheridan Libraries
>
> Johns Hopkins University
>
> 3400 N Charles St
>
> Baltimore, MD 21218
>
> jste...@jhu.edu
>
> 410-516-5493
>
> he/him/his
>
>
>
> *From:* archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org <
> archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org> *On Behalf Of 
> *Kottman,
> Miloche
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 13, 2019 1:37 PM
> *To:* Archivesspace Users Group <
> archivesspace_users_group@lyralists.lyrasis.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes
>
>
>
> I would prefer whatever enumeration had been used to label the pieces to
> avoid confusion for the patron.  For example, if the pieces are labeled v.
> 1-10 but your finding aid has series 1, v. 1-5 and series 2, v. 1-5, the
> patron is likely to be confused if they ask for series 2, v. 1 and get
> volume 6 when it’s paged.
>
>
>
> If there’s no label and/or you get to re-label, I recommend using the
> Arrangement note to explain that there are two series with 5 volumes each,
> e.g.
>
> Series 1, vol. 1-5 shelved as v. 1-5
>
> Series 2, vol. 1-5 shelved as v. 6-10
>
>
>
> Then do top containers as v. 1-10
>
>
>
> This is similar to what we do in the catalog for serials and monographs,
> i.e. a summary holdings statement followed by actual item records/barcodes
> for which volumes the library holds.
>
>
>
> --Miloche Kottman
>
> University of Kansas Libraries
>
>
>
> *From:* archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org <
> archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org> *On Behalf Of 
> *Hilton,
> Adrien
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 13, 2019 8:53 AM
> *To:* archivesspace_users_group@lyralists.lyrasis.org
> *Subject:* [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I’m in the process of retrospectively adding top containers to all of our
> 800,000+ archival objects. A large number of our collections are in volume
> format, housed on shelves as is, not in boxes. I’m wondering how folks are
> handling these types of “containers” in AS.
>
>
>
> Just for an example, the Jared Sparks papers consists of 10 individual
> volumes, which if these were boxes, of course would be Boxes 1-10. However,
> the material is a two part series, each consisting of 5 volumes each and
> referred to on spines as volumes 1-5 (1st series) and another volumes 1-5
> (2nd series). I’m disinclined to give them top containers Volumes 1-10
> and I don’t want to have two Volume 1 Top Containers in the same
> collection. Any advise on how to make this clear to users and manageable on
> the back end?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Adrien
> ___
> Archivesspace_Users_Group mailing list
> Archivesspace_Users_Group@lyralists.lyrasis.org
> http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/mailman/listinfo/archivesspace_users_group
>


-- 
Maureen Callahan
Sophia Smith Collection Archivist
Smith College Special Collections
Northampton, Massachusetts 01063
413 585 2981
mcalla...@smith.edu

Pronouns: she/her/hers

Smith College Special Collections is now housed at Young Library
<https://www.smith.edu/libraries/about/new-neilson/wheres-my-library>.
Learn more about renovations to Neilson Library here
<https://www.smith.edu/libraries/about/new-neilson>.
___
Archivesspace_Users_Group mailing list
Archivesspace_Users_Group@lyralists.lyrasis.org
http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/mailman/listinfo/archivesspace_users_group

Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

2019-02-13 Thread Jordon Steele 
I second (third?) the logic that the container indicator should exactly follow 
the volume label on the spine. So container type=Volume, container 
indicator=1-5 (1st series).

This may not work with your workflow, but two additional suggestions:


* Barcode each volume and add the barcodes to the container records so 
that staff can track them as such OR

* Put each volume in a custom box and barcode the box.

Best,

Jordon

Jordon Steele
Hodson Curator of the University Archives
Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
3400 N Charles St
Baltimore, MD 21218
jste...@jhu.edu<mailto:jste...@jhu.edu>
410-516-5493
he/him/his

From: archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org 
 On Behalf Of Kottman, 
Miloche
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 1:37 PM
To: Archivesspace Users Group 
Subject: Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

I would prefer whatever enumeration had been used to label the pieces to avoid 
confusion for the patron.  For example, if the pieces are labeled v. 1-10 but 
your finding aid has series 1, v. 1-5 and series 2, v. 1-5, the patron is 
likely to be confused if they ask for series 2, v. 1 and get volume 6 when it's 
paged.

If there's no label and/or you get to re-label, I recommend using the 
Arrangement note to explain that there are two series with 5 volumes each, e.g.
Series 1, vol. 1-5 shelved as v. 1-5
Series 2, vol. 1-5 shelved as v. 6-10

Then do top containers as v. 1-10

This is similar to what we do in the catalog for serials and monographs, i.e. a 
summary holdings statement followed by actual item records/barcodes for which 
volumes the library holds.

--Miloche Kottman
University of Kansas Libraries

From: 
archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org<mailto:archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org>
 
mailto:archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org>>
 On Behalf Of Hilton, Adrien
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 8:53 AM
To: 
archivesspace_users_group@lyralists.lyrasis.org<mailto:archivesspace_users_group@lyralists.lyrasis.org>
Subject: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

Hi,

I'm in the process of retrospectively adding top containers to all of our 
800,000+ archival objects. A large number of our collections are in volume 
format, housed on shelves as is, not in boxes. I'm wondering how folks are 
handling these types of "containers" in AS.

Just for an example, the Jared Sparks papers consists of 10 individual volumes, 
which if these were boxes, of course would be Boxes 1-10. However, the material 
is a two part series, each consisting of 5 volumes each and referred to on 
spines as volumes 1-5 (1st series) and another volumes 1-5 (2nd series). I'm 
disinclined to give them top containers Volumes 1-10 and I don't want to have 
two Volume 1 Top Containers in the same collection. Any advise on how to make 
this clear to users and manageable on the back end?

Thanks in advance,
Adrien
___
Archivesspace_Users_Group mailing list
Archivesspace_Users_Group@lyralists.lyrasis.org
http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/mailman/listinfo/archivesspace_users_group

Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

2019-02-13 Thread Kottman, Miloche 
I would prefer whatever enumeration had been used to label the pieces to avoid 
confusion for the patron.  For example, if the pieces are labeled v. 1-10 but 
your finding aid has series 1, v. 1-5 and series 2, v. 1-5, the patron is 
likely to be confused if they ask for series 2, v. 1 and get volume 6 when it's 
paged.

If there's no label and/or you get to re-label, I recommend using the 
Arrangement note to explain that there are two series with 5 volumes each, e.g.
Series 1, vol. 1-5 shelved as v. 1-5
Series 2, vol. 1-5 shelved as v. 6-10

Then do top containers as v. 1-10

This is similar to what we do in the catalog for serials and monographs, i.e. a 
summary holdings statement followed by actual item records/barcodes for which 
volumes the library holds.

--Miloche Kottman
University of Kansas Libraries

From: archivesspace_users_group-boun...@lyralists.lyrasis.org 
 On Behalf Of Hilton, 
Adrien
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 8:53 AM
To: archivesspace_users_group@lyralists.lyrasis.org
Subject: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

Hi,

I'm in the process of retrospectively adding top containers to all of our 
800,000+ archival objects. A large number of our collections are in volume 
format, housed on shelves as is, not in boxes. I'm wondering how folks are 
handling these types of "containers" in AS.

Just for an example, the Jared Sparks papers consists of 10 individual volumes, 
which if these were boxes, of course would be Boxes 1-10. However, the material 
is a two part series, each consisting of 5 volumes each and referred to on 
spines as volumes 1-5 (1st series) and another volumes 1-5 (2nd series). I'm 
disinclined to give them top containers Volumes 1-10 and I don't want to have 
two Volume 1 Top Containers in the same collection. Any advise on how to make 
this clear to users and manageable on the back end?

Thanks in advance,
Adrien
___
Archivesspace_Users_Group mailing list
Archivesspace_Users_Group@lyralists.lyrasis.org
http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/mailman/listinfo/archivesspace_users_group

Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

2019-02-13 Thread Paul Sutherland 
Hi Adrien,

How about: Volume 1.1-1.5; 2.1-2.5?

Best,
Paul

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:53 AM Hilton, Adrien 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> I’m in the process of retrospectively adding top containers to all of our
> 800,000+ archival objects. A large number of our collections are in volume
> format, housed on shelves as is, not in boxes. I’m wondering how folks are
> handling these types of “containers” in AS.
>
>
>
> Just for an example, the Jared Sparks papers consists of 10 individual
> volumes, which if these were boxes, of course would be Boxes 1-10. However,
> the material is a two part series, each consisting of 5 volumes each and
> referred to on spines as volumes 1-5 (1st series) and another volumes 1-5
> (2nd series). I’m disinclined to give them top containers Volumes 1-10
> and I don’t want to have two Volume 1 Top Containers in the same
> collection. Any advise on how to make this clear to users and manageable on
> the back end?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Adrien
> ___
> Archivesspace_Users_Group mailing list
> Archivesspace_Users_Group@lyralists.lyrasis.org
> http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/mailman/listinfo/archivesspace_users_group
>


-- 
*Paul Sutherland* (he/his)
Archivist of Native American Materials
Center for Native American and Indigenous Research
American Philosophical Society
105 S. 5th Street, 2nd Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19406
215-440-3408
amphilsoc.org/library/CNAIR

Browse our new Indigenous Subject Guide

and read our latest blog posts

Twitter: @paulssutherland 
___
Archivesspace_Users_Group mailing list
Archivesspace_Users_Group@lyralists.lyrasis.org
http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/mailman/listinfo/archivesspace_users_group

Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Top Containers for volumes

2019-02-13 Thread Belair, Andrea 
Can they be identified as children/grandchildren under the instance field
in the resource as archival objects?  I would be interested in hearing
feedback regarding this as well.
Andrea

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:53 AM Hilton, Adrien 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> I’m in the process of retrospectively adding top containers to all of our
> 800,000+ archival objects. A large number of our collections are in volume
> format, housed on shelves as is, not in boxes. I’m wondering how folks are
> handling these types of “containers” in AS.
>
>
>
> Just for an example, the Jared Sparks papers consists of 10 individual
> volumes, which if these were boxes, of course would be Boxes 1-10. However,
> the material is a two part series, each consisting of 5 volumes each and
> referred to on spines as volumes 1-5 (1st series) and another volumes 1-5
> (2nd series). I’m disinclined to give them top containers Volumes 1-10
> and I don’t want to have two Volume 1 Top Containers in the same
> collection. Any advise on how to make this clear to users and manageable on
> the back end?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Adrien
> ___
> Archivesspace_Users_Group mailing list
> Archivesspace_Users_Group@lyralists.lyrasis.org
> http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/mailman/listinfo/archivesspace_users_group
>


-- 
Andrea Belair
Archives and Special Collections Librarian
Schaffer Library
Union College
807 Union Street
Schenectady, NY 12308
518-388-6871
___
Archivesspace_Users_Group mailing list
Archivesspace_Users_Group@lyralists.lyrasis.org
http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/mailman/listinfo/archivesspace_users_group