Sirkka Valanto <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Dear colleagues,

>The Finnish National Gallery plans to start using the ICONCLASS
>classification in the FNG=92s collection=92s management and documentation
>system. However, in discussions  lots of questions have arisen particularl=
>y
>about its suitability as concerns modern and contemporary art.

>I have been asked to inquire about experiences elsewhere. So I hereby
>turn to colleagues asking for help. I am interested in experiences >in gene=
>ral,

Dear Mr. Alanto,

I am not an art-historian and I don4t know anything about ICONCLASS in
particular. All I know is, that this is a *very* scholarly system,
developed for art-historical issues. Although it is widespread in museum
work, it seems to represent the scholarly orientation of many museum
responsibles. I know examples out of the official museum business here
in Berlin, where the publication of newly aquired materials was delayed
because of the effort and expenses it takes to integrate the material
into ICONCLASS first. On the other hand this strong system prescribes
views on the collected items which cannot be easily changed afterwards.
ICONCLASS seems to me a strategy of collection management opposed to the
questions of "open standards", which where discussed in the Getty Art
History Information Program (AHIP)and elsewhere see:

http://www.ahip.getty.edu/ahip/Text_ahip2.html

If you can still decide if or not to use this particular system, you
should think twice. Perhaps it4s an historical trap.

I would appreciate further discussion on this topic, perhaps my
impression is basically wrong.

Best Regards
Karsten Borgmann M.A. - Dept. of History, Humboldt-Univ.- Berlin
email: [log in to unmask]
http://hppool0.rz.hu-berlin.de/~h0249kdx/kabo.html