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