relationships between actors and archival descriptions

[Victoria Peters]

Hi

I'm enjoying testing the new release. It's looking good!

I do have a problem, though. It's to do with recording relationships between actors and archival descriptions when the actor is the subject of the archival description. This was a problem in 1.0.8 and appears to be still a problem in 1.0.9.

What I want to do is say that a person or corporate body is simply the subject of an archival record. There appear to be two ways of doing this:

1. Just by recording the name as a name access point in the archival description (in exactly the same way as you would for a subject or place).
If I do this, an authority record is created for the name but no link is established between the authority record and the archival record. So, as a user, when you browse the list of names, you find an authority record but it is just standing on its own. There is no link from it to the archival record. Would it be possible to have this link automatically created every time you enter a name access point?

or

2. Creating an authority record and then establishing a relationship from it to the archival record. To do this, I added the term 'Subject' to the Event types taxonomy and then chose 'Subject' as the nature of the relationship. The result is fine in the authority record. http://ica-atom.org/strathclyde/401;isaar is an example. The person (in this case Patrick Meehan) is listed as the 'Subject of' the archival description, in this case the Papers of Ludovic Kennedy. If you go to the Papers of Ludovic Kennedy (http://ica-atom.org/strathclyde/1006;isad), the name Patrick Meehan is inserted ok in the Name Access points, with (subject) beside it. However, it is also inserted in the Date(s) field! I think this is because of a patch you applied to our application to get round some of the problems with the series system and to show different creators alongside their dates. However, it is having this unwelcome side effect of inserting all names here, even those which have nothing to do with creation. Actually, I wasn't too enamoured of this patch as a solution for the series system. With this extra complication, I don't like it at all :) Would it be possible to have it removed?

Thanks (as always) for your help.

Victoria

Victoria Peters
University Archivist
University of Strathclyde
Andersonian Library
101 St James' Road, Glasgow G4 0NS
Tel: 0141 548 5825
Fax: 0141 552 3304
Email: victori...@strath.ac.uk<mailto:victori...@strath.ac.uk>

University of Strathclyde Archives and Special Collections homepage strath.ac.uk/archives<http://www.strath.ac.uk/archives>
Follow us on Twitter twitter.com/StrathArchives<http://www.twitter.com/StrathArchives>

The University of Strathclyde is a charitable body registered in Scotland, no SCO 15263

[Victoria Peters]

I forgot to say that there is a further problem with creating an authority record and establishing a subject relationship (as in point 2 below). If you later go back to the same record eg The papers of Ludovic Kennedy http://ica-atom.org/strathclyde/1006;isad and edit it, AtoM has a habit of changing the 'Subject' relationship to 'Creation'. This happened to me just now. I was adding a couple of subject terms to the above archival description. When I saved the record, the relationship between Meehan and the Papers had changed to Creation. I had to go back to the authority record and re-establish the link.

Victoria
________________________________________
From: ica-ato...@googlegroups.com [ica-ato...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Victoria Peters [victori...@strath.ac.uk]
Sent: 17 June 2010 11:56
To: ica-ato...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [ica-atom-users] relationships between actors and archival descriptions

Hi

or

Victoria

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ICA-AtoM Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to ica-ato...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to ica-atom-user...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ica-atom-users?hl=en.

[Evelyn McLellan]

Hi Victoria,

It looks like you have identified three separate issues:

1. Adding a name access point does not automatically create a subject
relationship, which it should (there is in issue for this at
http://code.google.com/p/qubit-toolkit/issues/detail?id=986)

2. Creating a relationship with an event but no dates results in the
event appearing in the dates field of the archival description, which
it shouldn't

3. When using the relationships area of an authority record to add a
non-creation relationship with an archival description, editing the
archival description causes the relationship to switch to a creation
relationship - a serious bug

I don't think that any of this behaviour is related to a patch in your
system because my installed version of ICA-AtoM behaves in the same
way. The desired behaviour is that adding a name access point to an
archival description should result in the related authority record
being being linked as a subject, and the context menu in the authority
record should read "Subject of". This was supposed to be corrected in
1.0.9 but unfortunately it slipped through the cracks. For now, don't
use the relationships area of the authority record to create a subject
relationship. Just add name access points, and when you upgrade to 1.1
later this year the correct subject relationships will appear.

Sorry for the inconvenience, and thanks for your detailed issue
reporting. It really helps us.

Evelyn McLellan
ICA-AtoM Community Manager

On Jun 17, 4:26 am, Victoria Peters <victoria.pet...@strath.ac.uk>
wrote:
> I forgot to say that there is a further problem with creating an authority record and establishing a subject relationship (as in point 2 below). If you later go back to the same record eg The papers of Ludovic Kennedyhttp://ica-atom.org/strathclyde/1006;isadand edit it, AtoM has a habit of changing the 'Subject' relationship to 'Creation'. This happened to me just now. I was adding a couple of subject terms to the above archival description. When I saved the record, the relationship between Meehan and the Papers had changed to Creation. I had to go back to the authority record and re-establish the link.
>
> Victoria
> ________________________________________
> From: ica-ato...@googlegroups.com [ica-ato...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Victoria Peters [victoria.pet...@strath.ac.uk]

> Sent: 17 June 2010 11:56
> To: ica-ato...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: [ica-atom-users] relationships between actors and archival     descriptions
>
> Hi
>
> I'm enjoying testing the new release. It's looking good!
>
> I do have a problem, though. It's to do with recording relationships between actors and archival descriptions when the actor is the subject of the archival description. This was a problem in 1.0.8 and appears to be still a problem in 1.0.9.
>
> What I want to do is say that a person or corporate body is simply the subject of an archival record. There appear to be two ways of doing this:
>
> 1. Just by recording the name as a name access point in the archival description (in exactly the same way as you would for a subject or place).
> If I do this, an authority record is created for the name but no link is established between the authority record and the archival record. So, as a user, when you browse the list of names, you find an authority record but it is just standing on its own. There is no link from it to the archival record. Would it be possible to have this link automatically created every time you enter a name access point?
>
> or
>

> 2. Creating an authority record and then establishing a relationship from it to the archival record. To do this, I added the term 'Subject' to the Event types taxonomy and then chose 'Subject' as  the nature of the relationship. The result is fine in the authority record.http://ica-atom.org/strathclyde/401;isaaris an example. The person (in this case Patrick Meehan) is listed as the 'Subject of' the archival description, in this case the Papers of Ludovic Kennedy. If you go to the Papers of Ludovic Kennedy (http://ica-atom.org/strathclyde/1006;isad), the name Patrick Meehan is inserted ok in the Name Access points, with (subject) beside it. However, it is also inserted in the Date(s) field! I think this is because of a patch you applied to our application to get round some of the problems with the series system and to show different creators alongside their dates. However, it is having this unwelcome side effect of inserting all names here, even those which have nothing to do with creation. Actually, I wasn't too enamoured of this patch as a solution for the series system. With this extra complication, I don't like it at all :)  Would it be possible to have it removed?

>
> Thanks (as always) for your help.
>
> Victoria
>
> Victoria Peters
> University Archivist
> University of Strathclyde
> Andersonian Library
> 101 St James' Road, Glasgow G4 0NS
> Tel: 0141 548 5825
> Fax: 0141 552 3304

> Email: victoria.pet...@strath.ac.uk<mailto:victoria.pet...@strath.ac.uk>

[Evelyn McLellan]

Further to my previous message, I've added two new issues to our
developers' issues list: http://code.google.com/p/qubit-toolkit/issues/detail?id=1596
and http://code.google.com/p/qubit-toolkit/issues/detail?id=1597.

Evelyn

On Jun 17, 10:05 am, Evelyn McLellan <epmclel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Victoria,
>
> It looks like you have identified three separate issues:
>
> 1. Adding a name access point does not automatically create a subject

> relationship, which it should (there is in issue for this athttp://code.google.com/p/qubit-toolkit/issues/detail?id=986)

>
> 2. Creating a relationship with an event but no dates results in the
> event appearing in the dates field of the archival description, which
> it shouldn't
>
> 3. When using the relationships area of an authority record to add a
> non-creation relationship with an archival description, editing the
> archival description causes the relationship to switch to a creation
> relationship - a serious bug
>
> I don't think that any of this behaviour is related to a patch in your
> system because my installed version of ICA-AtoM behaves in the same
> way. The desired behaviour is that adding a name access point to an
> archival description should result in the related authority record
> being being linked as a subject, and the context menu in the authority
> record should read "Subject of". This was supposed to be corrected in
> 1.0.9 but unfortunately it slipped through the cracks. For now, don't
> use the relationships area of the authority record to create a subject
> relationship. Just add name access points, and when you upgrade to 1.1
> later this year the correct subject relationships will appear.
>
> Sorry for the inconvenience, and thanks for your detailed issue
> reporting. It really helps us.
>
> Evelyn McLellan
> ICA-AtoM Community Manager
>
> On Jun 17, 4:26 am, Victoria Peters <victoria.pet...@strath.ac.uk>
> wrote:
>

> > I forgot to say that there is a further problem with creating an authority record and establishing a subject relationship (as in point 2 below). If you later go back to the same record eg The papers of Ludovic Kennedyhttp://ica-atom.org/strathclyde/1006;isadandedit it, AtoM has a habit of changing the 'Subject' relationship to 'Creation'. This happened to me just now. I was adding a couple of subject terms to the above archival description. When I saved the record, the relationship between Meehan and the Papers had changed to Creation. I had to go back to the authority record and re-establish the link.

>
> > Victoria
> > ________________________________________
> > From: ica-ato...@googlegroups.com [ica-ato...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Victoria Peters [victoria.pet...@strath.ac.uk]
> > Sent: 17 June 2010 11:56
> > To: ica-ato...@googlegroups.com
> > Subject: [ica-atom-users] relationships between actors and archival     descriptions
>
> > Hi
>
> > I'm enjoying testing the new release. It's looking good!
>
> > I do have a problem, though. It's to do with recording relationships between actors and archival descriptions when the actor is the subject of the archival description. This was a problem in 1.0.8 and appears to be still a problem in 1.0.9.
>
> > What I want to do is say that a person or corporate body is simply the subject of an archival record. There appear to be two ways of doing this:
>
> > 1. Just by recording the name as a name access point in the archival description (in exactly the same way as you would for a subject or place).
> > If I do this, an authority record is created for the name but no link is established between the authority record and the archival record. So, as a user, when you browse the list of names, you find an authority record but it is just standing on its own. There is no link from it to the archival record. Would it be possible to have this link automatically created every time you enter a name access point?
>
> > or
>

> > 2. Creating an authority record and then establishing a relationship from it to the archival record. To do this, I added the term 'Subject' to the Event types taxonomy and then chose 'Subject' as  the nature of the relationship. The result is fine in the authority record.http://ica-atom.org/strathclyde/401;isaarisan example. The person (in this case Patrick Meehan) is listed as the 'Subject of' the archival description, in this case the Papers of Ludovic Kennedy. If you go to the Papers of Ludovic Kennedy (http://ica-atom.org/strathclyde/1006;isad), the name Patrick Meehan is inserted ok in the Name Access points, with (subject) beside it. However, it is also inserted in the Date(s) field! I think this is because of a patch you applied to our application to get round some of the problems with the series system and to show different creators alongside their dates. However, it is having this unwelcome side effect of inserting all names here, even those which have nothing to do with creation. Actually, I wasn't too enamoured of this patch as a solution for the series system. With this extra complication, I don't like it at all :)  Would it be possible to have it removed?

[Victoria Peters]

Thanks, Evelyn.

I'm glad to help!

Victoria

________________________________________
From: ica-ato...@googlegroups.com [ica-ato...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Evelyn McLellan [epmcl...@gmail.com]
Sent: 17 June 2010 18:44
To: ICA-AtoM Users
Subject: [ica-atom-users] Re: relationships between actors and archival descriptions

[Klaus Wendel]

Hallo Evelyn,

in V1.07 it had been possible to open a single authority record and to
print out any archival description related/linked to this object/
record.

Now resp. since V1.08, if I open an authority record, I only get the
records information itself and no list of related objects any more.
Thus, it does not make sense to use the records to browse the
contents. It is real pity.

Is there a workaround I disregarded?

Thanks for your Help,

Klaus

[David Juhasz]

Hi Klaus,

Are you referring to the context menu which show descriptions that are
linked to an actor? I've attached a screenshot from Release 1.0.9 of
ICA-AtoM which does show the fonds that was created by the actor
"TeleLearning Network Inc", which I think is what you want? If I'm
not understanding your question, please clarify.

David Juhasz,
Software Engineer, Artefactual Systems Inc.
http://www.artefactual.com | P: 604.527.2056 | F: 604.521.2059