I wanted to add a few more suggestions for you to investigate. Please take a look at the Visual Resource Association Foundation's Cataloguing Cultural Objects
content standard, another open standard that might guide your practice. It can be implemented using several different data exchange standards, including VRA Core, as well as CDWA Lite.
You can find more information on the CCO standard here: http://cco.vrafoundation.org/index.php/
The standard is available here: http://cco.vrafoundation.org/index.php/toolkit/cco_pdf_version/
Or in book form (2006): http://cco.vrafoundation.org/index.php/about/news_events_entry/258
Categories for the Description of Works of Art (CDWA) is a metadata standard, described by JISC as defining:
...categories for use in describing and accessing information about
art, architecture or cultural objects, along with any related images.
It includes more than 500 categories or sub-categories, thirty-six of
which are identified as 'core'. In addition to the full standard, there
is also CDWA Lite, a simplified version, encoded as XML and compatible
with OAI-PMH. CDWA is closely related to the content standard
Cataloguing Cultural Objects (CCO), which provides guidelines on how
information should be entered into selected CDWA and VRA Core
Find a freely available online book on CDWA here: http://www.getty.edu/research/publications/electronic_publications/cdwa/index.html
CDWA Lite information here: http://www.getty.edu/research/publications/electronic_publications/cdwa/cdwalite.html
PDF of the CDWA Lite Schema specifications here: http://www.getty.edu/research/publications/electronic_publications/cdwa/cdwalite.pdf
Finally, in around 2010 CWDA Lite was harmonized with the museumdat schema, to create a new XML-based harvesting schema called Lightweight Information Describing Objects (LIDO). Find more information about LIDO here: http://network.icom.museum/cidoc/working-groups/data-harvesting-and-interchange/what-is-lido/
As you can see, there are significant alternatives to SPECTRUM out there, that will ultimately make your data more exchangeable - and future-proof, since the specifications are open. First establish your chosen content standard, and then what metadata standard you would like to use to support this.
If your museum has even small budget for software acquisition to support this, I will put the following out there - Artefactual Systems
, working on an open-source and community based business model, aims to work with our community members by implementing development contracts for AtoM that benefit the entire community. One option for your institution, instead of purchasing an off-the-shelf solution or trying to force museum data into an ISAD(G) template in AtoM, would be to approach us off-list (via in...@artefactual.com
) about the possibility of developing a template to support one of these content standards, and/or the ability to import/export in your chosen metadata exchange format. This can be accomplished by partnering with other institutions who are interested in the same goal, reducing development cost burdens for all - and once it is developed, as an open-source application it will be freely available to other institutions (who then contribute to its improvement), and we carry forward all the maintenance in our future versions.
Another great part of open-source software is that you can always arrange for your institution to undertake this work yourself: all our code is publicly available and free to examine, use, modify, improve, and distribute. Our github repository is available here: https://github.com/artefactual/atom
and we maintain a developer's user forum for more technical questions here: https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en&fromgroups=#!forum/qubit-dev
Whatever method you choose for moving forward, please feel free to post us an update here in the future.