It's an interesting problem. Some of what you want to achieve can be
resolved through thinking first about the types of categories of information
you want to have about each object. There is the collection information that
can then be divided into layers of sub-collections, related collections etc.
You could create a collection that is 'KS3: History' with a sub-collection
'Empire' to which the photograph of elephant tusks belong. You would need an
object description that describes the original object which would be
'Format: image' 'Medium: Photograph' 'Sub-medium: print, black-and-white;'
'Name of creator' 'Date created: 1930' etc. Then a content description that
describes what can be seen in the photograph, and the location of that
content (where applicable); and then the associated information which could
be in a 'Theme' category eg 'Theme: trade' 'Sub-theme: ivory' or 'Theme:
conservation' 'Sub-theme: animals,' with the option of adding more than one
theme with related sub-theme etc. Putting most of the description in a
'Keyword' field into which anything and everything is dumped leads to
problems as the database grows. I have seen distinct retrieval problems with
large databases where most associated and content description information
has been entered as lots of 'keywords' in the one 'keyword' field -
especially where people haven't used or have ignored controlled word lists.
With a controlled word list, you can always add/construct a thesaurus that
contains the non-preferred terms (including words that the non-experts would
use), and create a glossary.
It is quite time-consuming to create databases like this but it does allow
the searching and browsing flexibility. I found that it also helped those
inputting to describe objects more fully because it gave them prompts as to
what information that might see/find. Try looking at some of the source
metadata behind pages about objects on the web sites accessible through the
Enrich Uk portal ( http://www.enrichuk.net/ ) - these feature objects from
museums, libraries and archives so there are a lot of sites covering a lot
of subjects and types of objects, and they are aimed at lifelong learners
but many aim to be relevant to academic and schoolchildren audiences too.
Janet E. Davis
----- Original Message -----
From: "H Hollis, Archaeology" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 9:40 PM
Subject: Artefact interpretation online
> Greetings everyone. (Apologies for cross posting.)
>
> I am working on a digital database structure that would allow users to
help
> structure the categories by which archaeological artefacts (including
> objects, documents, video footage, oral history) are classified within the
> database.
>
> For example, a photograph from Kenya in the 1930s would be classified by
> time and place, but might also be classified by the content of the
> photograph (elephant tusks) or activities associated with it (trade:
ivory)
> or indeed by how the artefact has been used (to teach KS3 History about
> Empire, or in a brochure for a museum exhibition). Those who use the
> database build up the meanings for that artefact over time.
>
> Does anyone know of similar work already in place on the web, for whatever
> size community base? Often I find that digital archives/databases for
> museums narrowly limit the artefact into very particular categories -- I
am
> interested in a more multi-vocal interpretation of the artefacts.
>
> Any input no matter how tenuous is welcome.
>
> H Hollis
>
> ----------------------
> H Hollis, Archaeology
> [log in to unmask]
|