To: Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Collections Management Software
From: [log in to unmask](Robert A. Baron)
Cc: [log in to unmask]
X-PipeUser: rabaron
X-PipeHub: nyc.pipeline.com
X-PipeGCOS: (Robert A. Baron)
X-Mailer: The Pipeline v3.4.0
To: Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Collections Management Software
From: [log in to unmask](Robert A. Baron)
Cc: [log in to unmask]
X-PipeUser: rabaron
X-PipeHub: nyc.pipeline.com
X-PipeGCOS: (Robert A. Baron)
X-Mailer: The Pipeline v3.4.0
On Jan 16, 1996 08:58:26, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>Forgive me if someone has asked this before, but WHY doesn't some
>vendor build a collections management system using one of the major
>relational databases? That way, when the company dies because the
>museum market is too small to support more than one company, the
>database and support for it will still be there. We have built our
>own on Informix because we couldn't afford Willoughby (thank
>heavens!) and were already using Informix for our archaeological
>site file and archival databases--and while ours is not perfect and
>doesn't have wonderful graphical screens, it's still there and we
>can change it any time we like. But we'd gladly have bought a system
>built on Informix if one had been available at the time, because we
>had already justified the significant cost of the basic database
>system.
>
>Pat Galloway
>MS Dept. of Archives and History
>
Pat and museumellers,
There are, indeed, a number of major vendors who use standard commercial
database products, including Willoughby who has used Q&A, Access, Oracle
and Informix, to name a few. Questor and Vernon Systems use Revelation
Technologies' Open Insight. The Gallery System uses FoxPro, and so on.
Nonetheless, some vendors, such as Oak Tree prefer to write their
applications in a programming language. There are both disadvantages and
advantages to using a high level programming language. Pat cites some of
the former; among the latter is the ability to control all aspects of the
application, the ability to write smaller faster code that supplies only
needed functions. In addition, by writing the application from the ground
up, the programmer is not dependent upon code created by a company that may
not find it so important to repair specific bugs that affect only a few
applications. Thus all faults can be repaired by the programmer.
Informix, incidentally, has been used by other museums and projects. What
comes to mind is the Getty Museum Prototype Project and a museum in
Huntington, West Virginia.
As in all cases, the database of choice is the one that best suits the
needs of the collection and its users. Sometimes strict relational systems
are just too limited to be suitable; sometimes complex Advanced Revelation
applications are just to involved to be workable. As in all cases, it is a
judgement call.
For a published description of an Informix System for a Fine Arts
collection, may I humbly (well, maybe no so) refer readers to my own
article: "The SWAP Project" that appeared some years ago in the
International Journal of Museum Management and Curatorship, and in an
abbreviated form in Spectra. I have a few offprints left of the IJMMC
article that I can send out to people who request a copy.
Robert A. Baron
Museum Computer Consultant
P.O. Box 93, Larchmont N.Y. 10538
[log in to unmask]
--
Robert A. Baron
Museum Computer Consultant
P.O. Box 93, Larchmont N.Y. 10538
[log in to unmask]
--
Robert A. Baron
Museum Computer Consultant
P.O. Box 93, Larchmont N.Y. 10538
[log in to unmask]
|
