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