You make an excellent point about differentiating between subject
classification and object naming.  This gets confused all of the time and
one sees museums trying to apply the Library of Congress Subject Headings
inappropriately.  Further, there has been very little discussion about
terminology controls in manual systems versus terminology controls in
automated systems.  They tend to be viewed as one in the same and aren't.
Much of what was trying to be achieved in the construction of terminology
lists such as Chenhall, LCSH, etc. was to solve problems rooted in the
physical properties of paper files whereas the problems are very different
in an automated system.

I think within the structure of an ANSI (AMerican National Standards
Institute) thesaurus, you can get pretty close to a universal terminology.
THe AAT certainly supports any number of synonyms for a term which can
include local variations and if the AAT is placed in a thesaurus structure
attached to a database there is no limit on how many local terms can be
added and yet kept distinct from the contents of the AAT.   I look forward
to seeing the work that you have been involved with.  It sounds fascinating.

>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Tue, 18 Mar 1997 10:31:00 PST
>From:    Barbara Palmer <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: simple name/terminology list
>
>Universal terminology?  It does seem impossible, or at least very difficult.
> How do we allow for local naming differences, which should be preserved?
> One solution is to put together a thesaurus constructed like Roget's: a
>thesaurus where you could look up a term and find out some other terms which
>were used by other museums for the same thing.
>
>Some people may not know that there is a difference between subject
>indexing, which is used in libraries, and object name indexing, which can
>also be used in museums.  Some indexing lists used by small museums may be
>combinations of the two.
>
>At the Powerhouse Museum, Sydney, we are using an object name thesaurus,
>which we have published, and we are currently developing a subject
>thesaurus.  Museums Australia's Victorian branch have published "The Small
>Museums Cataloguing Manual" which includes a simple classification of
>historical objects.  This list includes subject and object terms.  Because
>so many museums will be using this system, we are doing some checking to see
>that terms used in the classification list are in our own thesaurus, or are
>given references to terms that we use.  I hope that this will be a step
>towards interstate information accessibility, even though we do not have an
>Australian national standard terminology.
>
>Our object name thesaurus covers science and technology, decorative arts and
>social history, including a strong clothing and textiles section.  We follow
>Australian usage, and our definitions come from the Macquarie Dictionary,
>although not many terms differ from international usage.
>
>This thesaurus is available if anyone is interested.  Please feel free to
>contact me for more information or to discuss issues of terminology.
>
>Barbara Palmer
>Assistant Registrar (Collection Information System)
>Powerhouse Museum, Sydney
>[log in to unmask]
>fax: 61 2 9217 0158
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of MUSEUM-L Digest - 16 Mar 1997 to 17 Mar 1997
>***************************************************
>
>