Fabulous question Amanda! I'm cross-posting my response onto the TMS-list serv for other TMS users to see.
We have been doing a slow clean-up in our records, utilizing the components section more and more as we complete more in-depth object cataloguing. I'm currently going through an inventory of our Object Storage, and will create components for some objects, but not all.
Such as your example! If I locate a teacup and saucer in storage, where there are two separate records for one "object", I will not necessarily compress the two records into one. Instead, I'll make sure that they are related to each other as "associated" or "part of a set" (if it's part of a larger service set).
However, if I come across a teapot that has two separate records for the body of the teapot and its cover, I'll condense that into one record, and make sure that a component for each exists.
My former boss and I would have long, nerdy, discussions about object relationships and components, pros and cons, etc. At the moment, I feel that a happy medium is reached in terms of assessing the object itself and treating the decision as a case-by-case basis.
I hope this helps. How have others addressed this feature in TMS?
Best Regards,
Sarah Gillis | Assistant Registrar, Image Management
WORCESTER ART MUSEUM / www.worcesterart.org
fifty-five salisbury street / worcester, massachusetts 01609
508.799.4406/ direct 508.793.4427 / fax 508.799.8638
NOW ON VIEW
-----Original Message-----
From: Registrars Committee of the AAM [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Amanda Robinson
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 2:10 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [RCAAM] Use of Components in TMS Database
Dear Listserv,
I am curious how others catalog those works that have additional components in their TMS database. For example, if you have a cup and saucer set, would you create two separate object records for them, or would you create one object record and designate the cup an the saucer as component parts?
I am finding that in the past multiple object records have been created for works that have multiple components, such that a cup and it's saucer are 1993.003.001a and 1993.003.001b as two separate object records. One of my concerns is if this is an efficient means of cataloging? For example, if I were to query all objects, I would not receive an accurate read because there would be multiple object records for technically "one single" object.
How have others rectified these circumstances? Do you find the component aspect of an object record efficient for accurately cataloging a "cup and saucer"? If so, how does your object record look - i.e. 1993.003.001a-b?
Thank you all so much for your input!
Amanda Robinson
To unsubscribe from the RCAAM list, or change your subscription options, please click http://si-listserv.si.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=RCAAM&A=1
To unsubscribe, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the following commands in the body of the email:
signoff TMSUSERS
// eoj
You will receive a confirmation that your subscription has been removed.
|
