Thanks Carly. I understand that this is a work in progress, which is
why I am asking a lot questions to make sure I understand how it is
designed to work.
So if Museum X maintains separate vocabularies for person names
depending on their data source (e.g. ULAN, LCNAF, and a local list),
does that mean the same person (perhaps identified by different
preferred name forms in different vocabularies) may exist in more than
one vocabulary? If that is the case, in version 2.4 will it be the
case that all those name forms might be included in one person
authority record with one name form designated as preferred and the
On 4/2/12, Carly Bogen wrote:
> I'm pushing this discussion out to the Talk list because I think others
> might have the same question.
> In the CollectionSpace environment, an authority is made up of multiple
> vocabularies. For example, the Person authority may be made up of a local
> authority and the ULAN. However, users can also add terms directly to the
> authority itself.
> In your example, Museum X would have the choice of loading individual terms
> from TGN into a local vocabulary, into the entire Place Authority (without
> adding them to a specific vocabulary), or to load only the needed TGN terms
> into a TGN vocabulary under the Place Authority.
> Hope this helps! Please note that this is a work in progress. The
> intention is to solidify these plans next week with Design & Scope.
> *Carly Bogen*
> Acting Registrar
> MUSEUM OF THE MOVING IMAGE
> 36-01 35 Avenue, Astoria, NY 11106
> movingimage.us 718 777 6800
> Direct: 718 777 6841
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Janice Eklund
>> I guess what's confusing me is how the terms "vocabulary" and
>> "authority" are used in the CSpace environment. I'm used to thinking
>> of a "vocabulary" as providing the data values that populate fields of
>> an "authority record." This makes the vocabulary the data source for
>> the data values in an authority record but not necessarily a separate
>> list within the system to which terms may be added. For example,
>> Museum X may want to use terms from the TGN to populate a place
>> authority record without wanting to load the entire TGN list of terms
>> within an internal vocabulary list. Would this be possible under the
>> current spec?
>> On 4/2/12, Carly Bogen wrote:
>> > Hi Jan,
>> > In 2.4 we are building support for non-default vocabularies within an
>> > authority. This functionality should allow users to:
>> > -Combine multiple vocabularies to form one authority
>> > -Interact with each authority - e.g. search across all vocabs that
>> > make up the name authority, which we currently support in our
>> > authority fields
>> > -Interact with each vocabulary - via search, create new, add new term,
>> > etc. - currently limited to the default vocabulary in each authority
>> > Here's an example:
>> > Institution X has a Name Authority comprised of two vocabularies: the
>> > ULAN (Getty Union List of Artist Names) and a local name list (local
>> > artists, donors, employees).
>> > The institution must be able to:
>> > -Point term completion fields to the entire Name Authority, the ULAN,
>> > or the local list
>> > -Add new terms (via term completion UI) to either the ULAN or the local
>> > -Add new terms (via create new) to either the ULAN or the local list
>> > -Search (via find/edit) the entire Name Authority, the ULAN, or the
>> > local
>> > list
>> > These vocabularies would be managed in a new Vocabularies
>> > administration screen, seen here:
>> > We are also planning to add support for Preferred and Non-Preferred
>> > terms, as you mentioned. Terms will be PT or NPT for an entire
>> > authority, regardless of what vocabulary they are part of that makes
>> > up that authority. Indicating whether a term is preferred or
>> > non-preferred happens in the record itself, not in term completion,
>> > though the new hover pop-up for term completion will indicate whether
>> > an existing term is a PT or NPT.
>> > Indicating that a term is PT or NPT happens in a term record as seen
>> > here:
>> > This is the idea, but of course the particularities are still to be
>> > confirmed during Design & Scope next week.
>> > Let me know if that answers your question.
>> > Thanks,
>> > Carly
>> > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Janice Eklund > >
>> > wrote:
>> >> Hi Carly,
>> >> I'm a bit confused by the wireframe posted last week for Predictive
>> >> text (with equivalence and multiple vocabularies within the same
>> >> authority). My understanding is that the proposed changes to the
>> >> authorities structure will allow both preferred and non-preferred
>> >> terms to be recorded in a single authority (e.g. Person). The
>> >> wireframe seems to indicate multiple authorities, depending on data
>> >> source (ULAN and CONA) to which a new term might be added.
>> >> I was expecting something more along the lines of the attached pdf.
>> >> What am I not understanding?
>> >> Jan
>> > --
>> > __
>> > Carly Bogen
>> > Acting Registrar
>> > MUSEUM OF THE MOVING IMAGE
>> > 36-01 35 Avenue, Astoria, NY 11106
>> > movingimage.us 718 777 6800
>> > Direct: 718 777 6841
Talk mailing list