[MCN-L] DATABASE ACCESS FOR CURATORS
IN RESPONSE TO DATABASE ACCESS FOR CURATORS In setting up "rules" for adding and editing information, the specific features of the specific cms being used are critical to what you can do to control errors and consistency. With MIMSY XG, for example, the db administrator is able to do the following while in other cms, these features will not be available: 1. Each curator can have his/her own set of screens -- each screen can be customized to the curator's individual needs such as which fields to include, which to exclude, what order the fields appear in, what the field is called on the screen, help messages for each field specific to the application or project, and vocabulary controls on any or all fields that give specific instructions relevant to what the curator is doing. Among other elements. So, a natural history curator may have a entry/edit/query screen that looks quite different than the screen used by her colleague in the paintings department and neither curators' screens may look anything like the screen needed by the conservator. The db administrator can set fields to be read-only or editable or not to appear at all. The db administrator can also limit what records in the database can be accessed by any staff member within his/her security profile. A single curator may have many sets of screens, each for a specific project. For example, if a survey is being taken on whether arsenic preservatives may be present in bird specimens, the ornithologist's screen for this project might contain read-only fields by which the specimens can be located in storage and their identities verified along with several fields that the ornithologist can record survey information. This same screen can be ported to a hand-held or tablet for ease-of-use in a survey such as this where the curator needs to move around and between storage areas. Who updates the record and when is of course recorded automatically based on the curator's security login. 2. Accession numbers can only be changed by the db administrator. 3. Numerous primary fields such as Other Number, Display Title, Maker, Description, Date Made, etc, retain all changes made to them, who made the changes and why, as part of an object's running history. For example, the decorative arts curator needs to change the attribution on a table from Thomas Sheraton to Duncan Phyfe. He has been assigned the ability to update the Maker field as part of his set of screens. He queries for the record by any field value, the record appears on his screen. When he starts typing "Duncan Phyfe" into the Maker field, MIMSY XG will prompt the curator for the reason why the change is being made. The previous value and the new value are both stored and each is separately accessible so that on reports, the curator may want only the current attribution to appear, or in other instances, the current attribution along with all previous ones. 4. If a record for "Duncan Phyfe" already exists in the People Master File, MIMSY will indicate this [regardless of whether "Duncan Phyfe" or "Phyfe, Duncan" is entered] and automatically attach the object to Phyfe's record. If "Duncan Phyfe" does not exist in the People Master File, MIMSY prompts the user to create a record for him asking only whether the name is an individual or a non-individual and then will automatically create a record in the People Master File. This is all done without the curator having to leave the Object Master screen. If a record is created in the People Master File, it will automatically contain the name of the curator and the date he added "Duncan Phyfe" into the file. Essentially the same process occurs for each of the mission-critical fields recorded about an Object as well as for activities such as Location, Value, Condition, and other key processes. 5. MIMSY is designed to record as many descriptions as desired, precisely so that important information isn't lost when staff members' tastes change, or an exhibition is in the works, or the education department needs a K-8 description. Each description is retained along with its source, its purpose (terms can be controlled through "closed" pop-up lists rather than open-ended ones), its author, and so on. So a single object may have one or a hundred and one separate descriptions along with related information about the description, each of which is separately recorded, and separately accessible. Educators can quickly find all of the "published catalogue" descriptions. This enables a museum to retain all of the original information on the handwritten source cards through each exhibit label, visitor's guide, exhibit catalogue, on-line web displays, physical descriptions, art historical descriptions, docent tour descriptions, etc. Sorry that's so long. There is no reason that information should be lost once it has gone from paper to electronic form yet I see this repeatedly. It goes against basic collection management principles that were i
[MCN-L] NDF 2010 Conference: International Keynote Speakers Confirmed
Apologies for cross posting. National Digital Forum 2010 Conference Linking data, linking people Monday 18 - Tuesday 19 October 2010 Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, Wellington INTERNATIONAL KEYNOTE SPEAKERS CONFIRMED We're delighted to confirm Michael Edson and Nick Poole as the international keynote speakers: MICHAEL EDSON Director of Web and New Media Strategy, Smithsonian Institution Michael has worked on numerous award-winning projects and has been involved in practically every aspect of technology and New Media for museums. Read more. NICK POOLE CEO, Collections Trust Nick advises Governments, funders and cultural agencies throughout the world on issues relating to the new Digital Economy, including standards, IPR, social media and emerging business models. He has published and lectured worldwide, and is currently the Chair of the UK branch of the International Council of Museums. Read more. REGISTER TODAY The financial year is coming to a close on 30 June for Government. Check to see if your department has any reserve funds to allow you to register today! Register now: https://www.eiseverywhere.com/ereg/index.php?eventid=12560&; PRE and POST CONFERENCE ACTIVITIES DigitalNZ and National Services Te Paerangi are holding events around the NDF Conference. We encourage you to support these events too! 2nd Annual DigitalNZ Get Together 11:00am - 3:00pm, Sunday 17 October Level 1, National Library of NZ, 77 Thorndon Quay Contact: gathering at digitalnz.org You're invited to Digital BarCamp 9.30am and 3.30pm, Wednesday 20 October Venue: TBC Contact: luciep at tepapa.govt.nz Conference enquiries or further Information Visit the NDF website (http://ndf.natlib.govt.nz/about/2010-conference.htm) for full conference details and if you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact the conference organisers: Paardekooper and Associates Conference organisers of NDF 2010 P: +64 4 562 8259 F: +64 4 562 8269 E: ndf at paardekooper.co.nz W: http://ndf.natlib.govt.nz/about/2010-conference.htm +++ Visit the Te Papa website http://www.tepapa.govt.nz The email message together with the accompanying attachments may be CONFIDENTIAL. If you have received this message in error, please notify mail at tepapa.govt.nz immediately and delete the original message. The views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be views of Te Papa. Te Papa employs strict virus checking measures and accepts no liability for any loss caused either directly or indirectly by a virus arising from the use of this message or any attached file. +++
[MCN-L] Personalised visitor services at your institution?
Hello MCN, We would like to draw your attention to an online survey we are leading into museum's perceptions and use of personalised visitor services. See: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/2C8WMTL The concept of harnessing the potential of digital media to deliver more personalised visitor services is not new, but neither is it commonplace in cultural institutions today. Within this conceptual-practical balance, the aim of this research is to develop a better understanding of the use, challenges and future of personalised visitor services in museums around the world. We're hopeful the findings will be of interest and value to the community and we'll be publishing them online later towards the end of the summer. And as an incentive, respondents will be able to enter into a prize draw for 200 ? / US$250 of Amazon vouchers. The survey is only 15 questions long and should only take 10 minutes of your time. The survey is online at: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/2C8WMTL We hope you chose to participate, and look forward to sharing the results! Enjoy the rest of your day, Aur?lie Henry & Loic Tallon. survey at pocket-proof.com
[MCN-L] Database access for curators?
In message , Perian Sully writes > >Likewise, I can't tell you how many times I've gotten into discussions with >curators who want to delete the description field (used by registration for >identification purposes) in favor of a more contextual, historical "curated" >description. I have had to go into backups to restore the identifying >description and re-incorporate it. These days, I'm in favor of a curator's >description (or history, or curator's notes) field that the curators can >use, in addition to a physical description field for the registration staff. Interesting how experience varies on this issue. I'm not sure whether it's a North America/U.K. difference, or simply one between larger museums who can afford to have IT staff to argue with the curators, and the sort of smaller museums I tend to deal with. Anyway, I agree that there is a distinction to be made between an identifying description, and one designed to bring out an object's cultural and/or historical significance. The latter is presumably destined for consumption by the public, and it would clearly be more helpful to include it, for example, in a summary record on your web site. In our Modes data structure we have gone a step further, and provided a repeatable Commentary element, each with a defined Audience. This allows multiple semi-structured descriptions of an object, each targeted at a specific sector of the public. This helps address the perennial problem of how museums can generate interesting web pages directly from the information held within their collections management system. Richard -- Richard Light
