Hi Becca,
I don't think I've seen any replies to your post yet. I don't have answers
to all your questions, but some that might help. I'm sorry you're stuck
using the old system. I dealt first hand for years with the problems that a
string of 5 digit numbers can cause. I was fortunate to be able to convert
to trinomials, but of course had to live with the existing numbers in an old
collection.
It is absolutely no big deal to just start at the beginning of a new year
(or even in the middle of one) to use trinomials, and if you ever are able
to make the case again, there are a couple of really good reasons not to
continue with the one-to-infinity numbers, particularly since you've gone
over the 10,000 mark:
1) Mistakes due to transposed numbers. Like you, our numbers were up into
five digits. When people were numbering the artifact, taking inventory,
typing catalog cards (or computer), jotting down on pads to go look up etc,
etc., inevitably there were transposed numbers in the 5 digit string (at a
rates that seemed to me to be far higher than transposed numbers in 4 digit
strings), leading to great frustration and waste of time and energy to find
the correct number and fix. And such transpositions often create duplicate
number problems.
2) If you get a donation with numerous objects that will take a long time to
catalog, you can't skip over it and catalog the five single item donations
that came in after that. This can create frustrating backlogs. It's one
thing to have one or two large accessions backlogged that you are chipping
away at -if other collections are getting done you can deal with that- but a
large backlog of many accessions is depressing and even though you are
getting the same amount of work done, it always makes you feel farther
behind (and makes it look to others as though you are very far behind).
Also, information can get lost in the 'sands of time' if later collections
wait a long time to get catalogued after a big one.
As for your questions, PP allows you a collection name, and that might be
the way to connect items. Otherwise, only date of acquisition plus donor can
provide the connection between items that you are trying to achieve, and may
not be easy to find without file searches. If it's a small number of
connected items, you could put "see also's" in the text, or in a 'related
artifacts' data field, but if it is a large number of items it would be
impractical to get them all cross-referenced.
As for the old donations, you'll probably have to rely on old paper lists,
donation records or card files to make the connections you want to make
between items. If there were reasonably good paper records, you can get a
lot of info from them.
Bottom line, though, is that you are right. It is much more difficult and
time consuming to make connections between artifacts in a sequential number
system than if you had used a trinomial number with the year, the accession
number, and the item number. With the trinomials you know immediately which
are from the same accession.
Lucy Sperlin
Butte County Historical Society
Oroville, California
-----Original Message-----
From: Museum discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Becca Hiller
Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2006 2:27 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Intergrating PastPerfect into old numbering system
Oh Wise ones,
I am relatively new to the Museum profession and I am in need of
help. The museum I work at has been using a chronological numbering
system (ie. 1,2,.....100,101...10000,10001...ect)for each object.
This number does double duty as the accession number and the object
number. When I first joined the museum I approached the Director
about switching to the system recommended by Rebecca Buck's book The
New Museum Registration Methods. (2006.1.1) I felt it was a good
time to switch if it was ever going to happen...No objects had been
accessioned in 2006 and the number 10,000 was next. I was told that
we had to stay with the old system so...how do I integrate this
numbering system into PastPerfect and make the neccessary connections
between objects from one donation, using one accession record? These
objects may be spread across the 3-D collections, archives, library,
or photo collection. I am sure there is a simple way staring me in
the face but I just can't see it. Also, how about old donations?
How do they fit into what I am asking? Will I be able to make
connections between the objects of donations from ten, twenty, thirty
years ago?
We currently have PastPerfect 2.6 but it was not really used before I
arrived. I really like the system and we are upgrading to 3.5.
Thanks in advance for all the help,
Becca Hiller
Curator/Archivist
Santa Fe Trail Center
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message
to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help"
(without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to
[log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff
Museum-L" (without the quotes).
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
|
