Thanks Jeri,

 

For the most part, we encourage people to go to the object package tool directly, too.  This isn’t hard, since hardly anyone WANTS to use the advanced query if they don’t have to!  The problem we would have with this approach is that we largely go to AQ for object package names when we’re trying to do a query for things that are NOT in an object package.  For that, we really need the distinct name list—or, at least, it makes it a lot easier when we’ve had to search for everything that IS in object package A, but not in object package B.  (if you follow me?)

 

It’s really similar to the problem we have with doing advanced queries by container name.  I’ve been really pleased that people have started doing searches by container name, but of course they get frustrated when the boxes that begin with “PR” don’t show up in the list because the list is already too long.

 

Surely there’s a programming thing that can expand the number of things in the list?  (says the boob who knows the absolute least amount about anything remotely technical of anyone on this list…)

 

David

 

From: The Museum System (TMS) Users [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Moxley, Jeri
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 4:23 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Object Package Names

 

Hi David,

 

We have our query on object package name configured to be a free text search. Users just have to remember to use quotation marks when searching if there’s a space in the name (which we discourage) and, of course, have to get the name right.

 

We also advise users to go to the object package tool directly, rather than to a query option, start typing the package name, and when they find the one they want, hit the Execute button on the package tool to execute a query for that set of records. This method gets the records in the order specified in the package, and they can change the order in the list view by clicking on any column header to re-sort the records on screen.

 

Our package naming convention is:

 

To facilitate both searching and organization, the standard naming convention for object packages is:

Dept–initials–project

http://staff.moma.org/img/bullet.gifExample: DRAW-KC-DubuffetViewing4-7-09

Never include spaces or punctuation other than dashes in your object package name.

 

 

 

Jeri Moxley

Manager, Collection and Exhibition Technologies

Collection Management and Exhibition Registration

The Museum of Modern Art

11 West 53 Street, New York, NY 10019-5497

Tel. (212) 708-9599 Fax. (212) 333-1102

 

 

 

From: The Museum System (TMS) Users [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Aylsworth, David
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 4:42 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Object Package Names

 

One of the problems we have with object packages is the apparently finite number of object package names that can show in the drop down when you do an advanced query for object package name.  The same seems to hold true with fields like container name.  We have object packages that alphabetically go up to “zuni”, but when I search by object package name in AQ, I can’t search any higher than “Hevrdejs”.

 

Is that being fixed in TMS 2010, or is it something that is able to be fixed now with 9.35?

 

 

From: The Museum System (TMS) Users [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jay Hoffman
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 1:52 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Object Package Names

 

That is already done and available in TMS 2010.

 

From: The Museum System (TMS) Users [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Felton, Larry
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 2:49 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Object Package Names

 

It would be really nice to some similar mechanism (e.g. folders) for organizing reports as well.  

 

From: The Museum System (TMS) Users [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Linda Pulliam
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 11:45 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Object Package Names

By department

Then by staff member

Then by project

 

Cheers

 

From: The Museum System (TMS) Users [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jay Hoffman
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 2:41 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Object Package Names

 

I was thinking the same thing. It could be organized by owner, project (a new field), global, etc.  How do you see the hierarchy groupings?

 

From: The Museum System (TMS) Users [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ryan Donahue
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 11:27 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Object Package Names

 

We are actually looking at this problem now, folders would be a really welcome addition to object packages (that is to say, a hierarchical organization for object packages).

 

Our present plan is to expose a web interface for un/archiving object packages on demand (we already have such an interface for transferring object packages to our DAM).

 

My other thought was to treat global object packages like a communal fridge -- periodically (2x year?) turning all global object packages (with some exception) non-global, and letting people bug my department when they need it (or use the web interface) to turn object packages back on.

 

-Ryan Donahue

George Eastman House