You should get a stack of AOL disks circa 1990’s; those had
unique pass phrases (like “Blue Melon”) which you could use to create
sure-to-be-unique names.
From: The Museum System
(TMS) Users [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Moxley,
Jeri
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 2:55 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Object Package Names
Yeah…we
always do that equal to/not equal to object package query for our users (and we
usually make new packages that we use and delete, with crazy sure-to-be-unique
names like “bunnyrabbit” and “cutiepie”). It would be great if that was more
user-friendly. People need it all the time.
From:
The Museum System (TMS) Users [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Aylsworth, David
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 5:35 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Object Package Names
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
Example:
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