Tech, Med, and Material Singular terms

[StephCornwell]

As discussed with Shrigley, not possible with legacy data all being in plurals.

Could just make them plurals for the sake of continuity or explain the difference between singular in free text and multiple in genre/tech access point.

[StephCornwell]

Also, the issue of using different terms in the free text field and the 'authority' field (ie. ink on paper vs. ink drawings). In Calm we don't have that genre/tech field so need for consistency higher (I originally put ink drawing on paper when doing shrigley for this reason).

[VickyTEI]

As discussed with Shrigley, not possible with legacy data all being in plurals.

Could just make them plurals for the sake of continuity or explain the difference between singular in free text and multiple in genre/tech access point.

We could specify the ideal is singular, but legacy data lists the authorised terms as plural. The Genre terms are too tied up with the rest of the catalogue & are standard MARC, so not possible to change. But it should be relatively easy to singularise if the data was exported from Sierra. So I think mention the anomaly of the plural occurrences in MARC data - it is where the record is noting/grouping the sames types/genres of things. Whereas elsewhere in the record we are describing that specific object, hence the singular form. I would aim for singular wherever possible in the record. One question - are we thinking of introducing the concept of genres to Calm records? Or is there another option? Filtering archives would be useful.

It might be clearer to introduce the discussion about the anomaly of plural terms in the specific Sierra Guidelines.

[VickyTEI]

Also, the issue of using different terms in the free text field and the 'authority' field (ie. ink on paper vs. ink drawings). In Calm we don't have that genre/tech field so need for consistency higher (I originally put ink drawing on paper when doing shrigley for this reason).

Again I think the only option is to work around the genre terms and create the rest of the record as the ideal. Looking at other catalogues it is common to either list the technique and medium together or separate out (looks like this is where pick lists come in). The actual technique (ie drawing) often is omitted as it is covered in the object type. To me it reads better as 'ink on paper'. The Wellcome genre terms are more common to library settings, not ones often combined in museum databases - if we restrict their use to a genre field it would be easier to clean up in the future, if needed.

Other catalogues: British Museum: Object type = Drawing, Technique = drawn - so different terminology used here. Materials & Technique from pick lists, but the main description goes into the detail, e.g. 'Brush and grey ink over graphite sketch' V&A: Object type = Drawing, Technique = drawn. Materials & technique includes terms from a pick list + a free text description, e.g. drawn, written, pen, ink. 'pencil and pen and ink on paper' Ashmolean: Object type = drawing, Technique & materials = free text e.g. 'pen and black ink on pink paper' Guggenheim: Artwork type = Work on paper. Medium = Ink on paper

The framework is to identify the metadata content in the records, not how it is presented - we can cover that in the cataloguing guidelines, it may be that Calm & Sierra have to treat the data slightly differently at times.

The easiest way to demonstrate where the framework elements appear in either a Calm or Sierra record will be with the Crosswalk, which I don't think we should attempt until after we have written the guidelines. We wont necessarily use the same fields as listed on the CDWA one. For MARC it is inevitable some data will be repeated within a record, it doesn't all have to be exported in the future.

[VickyTEI]

I've just re-read CDWA & they take the Materials & Technique approach - they see medium as part of materials:

"The subcategories in this section identify the substances and materials of which a work of art or architecture is composed. It also identifies the techniques and methods of production used to create the work. For groups of works, it describes all the materials and techniques used to create items in the group, or it describes the most important or most typical materials and techniques evident in the group. Where applicable, the "role" of a material may be distinguished as medium (e.g., oil paint, watercolor, graphite) or as support (e.g., canvas, oak panel, laid paper)."

This might be a simpler approach. It seems to be taken by a number of museums.

[VickyTEI]

As discussed with Shrigley, not possible with legacy data all being in plurals. Could just make them plurals for the sake of continuity or explain the difference between singular in free text and multiple in genre/tech access point.

We could specify the ideal is singular, but legacy data lists the authorised terms as plural. The Genre terms are too tied up with the rest of the catalogue & are standard MARC, so not possible to change. But it should be relatively easy to singularise if the data was exported from Sierra. So I think mention the anomaly of the plural occurrences in MARC data - it is where the record is noting/grouping the sames types/genres of things. Whereas elsewhere in the record we are describing that specific object, hence the singular form. I would aim for singular wherever possible in the record. One question - are we thinking of introducing the concept of genres to Calm records? Or is there another option? Filtering archives would be useful.

It might be clearer to introduce the discussion about the anomaly of plural terms in the specific Sierra Guidelines.

Actually I've just looked and it is possible to record the singular forms in MARC - in 340 - useful if the terms were to be exported but would make extra work cataloguing. It is also possible on a broad scale in the fixed fields - this is already done & could aid searching, but isn't visible to the public.

Just tried the 340 - it displays as Materials in Encore!!! Would be easy to expose in Works but we need to hide the rda coding in the |2 subfield. But in short, the option for singular terms is there.