>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> --------------4EB56D8BFB4AE6E854057E24
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Jeff,
> Yes and No, seems to be the answer  to your question of cross listing
> artifacts.
>
> I finding that many museums are cross-referencing Nomenclature categories.
> I tend to disagree with that for two reasons:  1)    Nomenclature, (which
> has pretty much become the standard for history museums and is useful for
> anthropological collections as well  --aren't they just someone elses
> history?),  is considered a taxonomy of man-made items, and in a true
> taxonomy you can't put things in more than one place -each has only one
> relationship to all others --original intended (primary) use in the case of
> man-made things.  The instructions in   N. is to use a single classification
> and if it is hard to choose, the system was arranged heirarchically so that
> you should use the one that came first in the heirarchy.   2) Using this
> provides a structure that allows you to know exactly how many artifacts of
> each type you have.  If you start cross cataloguing, you will skew your
> artifact count per category.   3) I think 'original intended use' is a
> somewhat limited way of classifying artifacts. Many have associations that
> have little or nothing to do with actual use.
>
> That's why I advocate a separate data field for subject headings based on
> what I call "associated human activities" in which you can cross-list to
> your hearts content.  For the development of interesting exhibits based on
> concepts not just a type of artifact, this is really the more useful data
> field in my estimation, because you can retrieve so many different things,
> from classifications that you might never think to look in.  (example:  a
> lunch box associated with a  particular trade or industry - or how about a
> horsewhip used to train a pachyderm??).    Especially with photos, which
> often show lots of different things in one, I have given as many as 10
> subject headings (though the average is probably two or three).  Of course
> this takes more time up front when your are cataloguing, but it seems like
> 'that's the job'....
>
> It would be good to hear how other's are dealing with multiple
> associations......
>
> Lucy Skjelstad
>
>
>
>
>
> Jeff wrote:
>
> > I am not a collections manager, but would it not be acceptable to cross
> > list objects
> > such as Tarot cards.   Just a thought.
> >
> > Jeff Northam
>
>
>
> --------------4EB56D8BFB4AE6E854057E24
> Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Content-Description: Card for Lucy  Skjelstad
> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"
>
> begin:          vcard
> fn:             Lucy  Skjelstad
> n:              Skjelstad;Lucy
> adr;dom:        ;;;Corvallis;OR;;
> email;internet: [log in to unmask]
> tel;home:       541 757-3174
> x-mozilla-cpt:  ;0
> x-mozilla-html: FALSE
> version:        2.1
> end:            vcard
>
>
> --------------4EB56D8BFB4AE6E854057E24--
>