Hi Jeri - At the Warhol - we use Classification as the broadest category you can assign to an object. We have about 17 total broad categories, which encompass what we have in the Art, Archives, and Film/Video collections. I can share the list with you if you like. We referenced the AAT, Library of Congress, VRA, and other applicable lists, to come up with the most agreed upon standard terminology we could find for these categories. We use Object Name (renamed "Object Name/Heading") to specify the "narrower" grouping/term something could belong to. Here also, we referred to the Library of Congress, AAT, etc. to come up with headings. Since this field isn't really controlled by an authority list, we have to be very careful, and not make typos. We don't use the assistant that is linked to this field...it's not necessary for us, and I'm not actually sure how it works anyway. I have this field set to be searched as a distinct list, so it's easier for users to find what they are looking for. One may only choose a single term/heading for this field. In the Attributes, I've created a field called "Category," in which we created a local authority list of items terms, again, to more narrowly categorize something. As many terms as necessary can be linked to an object using this field. Also in the Attributes, we have a field called "Controlled Object Name" in which we link the most specific term(s) we can attribute to an object, from the AAT. So, here's an example to illustrate how an object might be catalogued using these fields (and hopefully explain why we set them up in this complex way). EXAMPLE: In the Archives collection - we have a fan letter to Warhol, in an envelope, with an enclosed black-and-white photograph, and an additional trinket (let's say, a plastic McDonalds happy meal ring). Classification: Manuscript Material Object Name/Heading: Correspondence Category: Correspondence Photographs Collectibles Jewelry Controlled Object Name: gelatin silver prints letters (correspondence) envelopes collectibles finger rings I hope this helps - if you need any further explanation, please let me know. Happy weekend everyone. Allison .................................................................. .................................................................. the warhol: Allison A. Smith Collection Manager / Database Administrator 117 Sandusky Street Pittsburgh, PA 15212 T 412.237.8345 F 412.237.8340 E [log in to unmask] < mailto:[log in to unmask]> W www.warhol.org < http://www.warhol.org <http://www.warhol.org/> > W www.warholstore.com < http://www.warholstore.com <http://www.warholstore.com/> > The Andy Warhol Museum One of the four Carnegie Museums of Pittsburgh .................................................................. .................................................................. They always say time changes things, but you actually have to change them yourself -- Andy Warhol .................................................................. .................................................................. -----Original Message----- From: The Museum System (TMS) Users [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Jeri Moxley Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 6:27 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Classification & Object Type Hi all, We have a committee re-evaluating our current use of Object Type and Classification in TMS. We've historically used "Object Type" for a general, registrar-controlled categorization of objects (painting, photograph, work on paper...) and "Classification" has been a slightly more specific categorization controlled by curatorial. We're now looking at refining our terms in Classifications, and adding Thesaurus-controlled data entry for subclassifications. Has anyone tackled this issue? Would love to know and pass along to my staff what other institutions are doing with these fields. We are particularly concerned with terminology for contemporary artworks. Thanks, Jeri **** Jeri Moxley TMS Specialist Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum (212) 423-3509