Archive for the ‘Nomenclature’ Category

  • Exciting changes are happening at the 800+ organizations taking part in the StEPs program (Standards and Excellence Program for History Organizations). Our “StEPs Spotlight” series highlights accomplishments by the participating organizations. Below is another example of how StEPs is helping organizations take a leap forward by improving policies and practices, opening lines of communication, and setting […]

  • 28 Within Nomenclature 4.0 there are a few variations on the term “Model,” which falls under the classification of Documentary Artifacts, sub-class Other Documents. Most of the variation of the terms fall under this same umbrella as a secondary term such as “Model, Patent” or “Model, Topographic.” But is there a time when a model […]

  • When Nomenclature was first written it was designed to represent objects that are man-made. So, how do natural history collections fall into this lexicon? Well, the answer is up to your individual institution. The Nomenclature Task Force has had a lengthy discussion about natural history specimens and determined that, for the purposes of the current […]

  • Shortly after Nomenclature 4.0 was released, a colleague of mine John Neill, Riley County Historical Museum contacted me through social media asking, “Not sure if I’m surprised or not- or disappointed or not- to not find ‘Koozie’ in Nomenclature 4.” My first response was to suggest “Holder, Beverage” or “Holder, Insulated Beverage.” As I asked some follow-up […]

  • If you are using PastPerfect 5 to catalog your museum collections, you might be a little intimidated by all of the fields available for the data entry of object names. Using the PastPerfect Field Descriptions found online on PastPerfect’s website, here is a quick reference for how you might choose to use some or all of […]

  • For those of you who purchased Nomenclature 4.0 you’ll be receiving a surprise in the mail in the near future, or perhaps you’ve already received it and have it sitting on your desk. As the Nomenclature Task Force continues to work on, expand, and improve future revisions for Nomenclature, we thought it an opportune moment […]

  • In the spring of 2014, I responded to a call for book proposals for the AASLH series at Rowman & Littlefield. I’d worked for three years at the Quilt Index, an online archive of—you guessed it—quilts, and since receiving my Ph.D. in 2011, I’ve taught courses in digital museum studies at a couple different universities, […]

  • One of the great benefits of Nomenclature 4.0 is that it corrects the errors that we found after Nomenclature 3.0 was published. But, wouldn’t you know it, new errors had a habit of creeping in. The new edition has been out for six months now, and we’ve only found three errors so far: “Loom, Weight” (pp. […]

  • New Nomenclature 4.0 users that are familiar with Revised Nomenclature or Nomenclature 3.0 will notice a change in the naming of the hierarchical levels within the classification system. Whereas previous versions of Nomenclature referred to the three hierarchical levels as “Category,” “Classification,” and “Sub-classification,” Nomenclature 4.0 refers to “Category,” “Class,” and “Sub-Class.” This change was made […]

  • Today’s world is increasingly inundated with new models of mobile devices. This increase of various technological devices prompted the Nomenclature Task Force to think about the terminology for multi-functional mobile devices. Nomenclature 3.0 provided somewhat sufficient terms in Category 6: Tools & Equipment for Communication yet lacked the seemingly appropriate terminology for these types of […]