The professionals on this forum will clearly have great advice to help you resolve this issue. On the technical PastPerfect side, just beware that the OBJECTID# must be unique across all four catalogs(objects, photos, archives, and library.) Beware of adding prefix describing an artifact in the objectid as coding is usually not recommended.
Call the PastPerfect Support Team if you would like to discuss further.
Brian L. Gomez
Vice President, Operations
PastPerfect Software, Inc.
300 N. Pottstown Pike Suite 200
Exton, PA 19341
Toll Free Sales and Support: 1-800-562-6080 ex 102
Direct Dial: 1-610-363-7844 ex 102
Mobile: 1-484-883-4198
Fax: 1-610-363-7845
Twitter: PastPerfectInfo
PastPerfect-Online is the fast, affordable and easy way to share your PastPerfect collections via the World Wide Web. It provides your visitors with simple, Web-based communication tools, and you get statistics on the numbers of visitors and their searches. For more information, contact us at [log in to unmask] or 1-800-562-6080.
-----Original Message-----
From: Museum discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dan Grzesiak
Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2010 12:14 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [MUSEUM-L] Overlapping Numbering Systems
I am charged with organizing, and inputting into PastPerfect, a collection with multiple numbering systems. The systems use sequential numbers, and, unfortunately, the same numbers apply to multiple objects. For example, there is a 103 that is a photograph, a 103 that is a film negative, a 103 that is a stereoscope, a 103 that is a daguerreotype, and a 103 that is a slide. The 3D collection was also numbered this way, but since it is in a different PastPerfect category (“Objects,” not “Photos”), I don’t think any modification will be necessary.
The easiest solution would seem to be adding a prefix to PastPerfect entries (e.g. PP=photograph, NF=negative, ST=stereoscope, DA=daguerreotype, and SL=slide), but not attempting to renumber the artifacts or their catalog cards. My biggest concern with this is that the discrepancy between the artifact number and PastPerfect number will create confusion, especially as time passes. I'm also worried about future expansion of the collection -- for the time being, at least, the sequential numbering system will remain in place.
Has anyone had experience dealing with an issue like this?
Dan Grzesiak
Curator, Santa Fe Trail Center
Larned, KS
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
|
