MUSEUM-L Archives

Museum discussion list

MUSEUM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Leonard Will <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 29 May 1997 21:55:27 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (47 lines)
In article <[log in to unmask]>, TELLOGLEIO FOUNDATION
<[log in to unmask]> writes

>When we have a set of objects that relate to each other (such as a
>triptych) how do you deal with it?

I have just a few comments to add to the useful replies already posted
by Richard Gerrard and Robert Baron. They have pointed out the problem
of deciding what items should be considered "parts".

As Richard said, some of the problems should be overcome if you have a
properly structured relational database system. Then each item which is
worth describing separately can be catalogued as an object in its own
right (the fullness of the record may vary according to need).

You should then be able to specify relationships between objects, e.g.
that B "is a part of" A, or that X "is a reproduction of" Y. These
relationships should be able to be changed without changing the object
records, and any one record should be able to have many relationships;
for example B, which is a part of A, may itself have parts C, D and E.

Some relationships may imply inheritance of attributes. If B "is a part
of" A then it may be assumed that, e.g. production and acquisition
information for B will be the same as that for A, _unless_ they are
specifically recorded as different in the record for B.

(That is the theory; does anyone have software in which this type of
structure has been implemented fully and effectively for use in
practice?)

Embodying these relationships in the format of acquisition or accession
numbers is traditional, but it can cause problems if relationships
change. The number given to an object should as far as possible be fixed
for its life, and this is best achieved if the numbers don't embody
meaningful structure (apart from perhaps a year). For the same reason it
is not wise to have components of an accession number to represent the
subject category or departmental code to which it is initially assigned.

Leonard Will

--
Willpower Information       (Partners: Dr Leonard D Will, Sheena E Will)
Information Management Consultants                 Tel: +44 181 372 0092
27 Calshot Way, Enfield, Middlesex, EN2 7BQ, UK    Fax: +44 181 372 0094
[log in to unmask]           [log in to unmask]
------------------ http://www.willpower.demon.co.uk/ -------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2