RL
Ray Lee
Fri, Nov 6, 2015 1:56 AM
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (
https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements),
and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in
the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement
procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a
countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you
wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over
there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of
"conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so is
just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (
https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements),
and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in
the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement
procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a
countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you
wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over
there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of
"conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so is
just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
RM
Richard Millet
Fri, Nov 6, 2015 3:21 PM
Ray,
I think just "conservation" should be fine. The "media" service is a good example of a non-pluralized service.
-RIchard
From: Talk talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org on behalf of Ray Lee rhlee@berkeley.edu
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 7:56:07 PM
To: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements), and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of "conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so is just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
Ray,
I think just "conservation" should be fine. The "media" service is a good example of a non-pluralized service.
-RIchard
________________________________
From: Talk <talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org> on behalf of Ray Lee <rhlee@berkeley.edu>
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 7:56:07 PM
To: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements), and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of "conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so is just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
PM
Peter Murray
Fri, Nov 6, 2015 3:26 PM
Hey Ray,
This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
Peter
On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee rhlee@berkeley.edu wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements), and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of "conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so is just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company
Hey Ray,
This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
Peter
> On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee <rhlee@berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
> I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements <https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements>), and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
>
> Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of "conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so is just conservation ok?
>
> Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
>
> Thanks,
> Ray
> _______________________________________________
> Talk mailing list
> Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company
JB
John B Lowe
Fri, Nov 6, 2015 4:12 PM
I overheard Al and Michael talking about what would actually be going into
the procedure, and related procedures, such as Analysis (which has problems
of its own from the point of view of pluralization).
However, they were observing that the core concept of the procedure
centered on the idea of recording information about "treatments" of
objects, whether for conservation analysis, or other purposes.
So...how about Treatments?
John
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Peter Murray pmurray@chillco.com wrote:
Hey Ray,
This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive
to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities
realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
Peter
On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee rhlee@berkeley.edu wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (
https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements),
and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in
the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement
procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a
countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you
wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over
there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of
"conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so
is just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
I overheard Al and Michael talking about what would actually be going into
the procedure, and related procedures, such as Analysis (which has problems
of its own from the point of view of pluralization).
However, they were observing that the core concept of the procedure
centered on the idea of recording information about "treatments" of
objects, whether for conservation analysis, or other purposes.
So...how about Treatments?
John
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Peter Murray <pmurray@chillco.com> wrote:
> Hey Ray,
>
> This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive
> to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities
> realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
>
>
> Peter
>
> On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee <rhlee@berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
> I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (
> https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements),
> and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in
> the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement
> procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
>
> Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a
> countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you
> wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over
> there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of
> "conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so
> is just conservation ok?
>
> Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
>
> Thanks,
> Ray
> _______________________________________________
> Talk mailing list
> Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
>
> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
>
>
>
> --
> Peter Murray
> Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
> Cherry Hill Company
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk mailing list
> Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
>
> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
>
>
RM
Richard Millet
Fri, Nov 6, 2015 4:24 PM
Let's not go with "treatment" just because it is easier to pluralize. I think Megan and other members of the Functional Working Group should comment?
From: Talk talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org on behalf of John B Lowe jblowe@berkeley.edu
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 10:12 AM
To: Peter Murray
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
I overheard Al and Michael talking about what would actually be going into the procedure, and related procedures, such as Analysis (which has problems of its own from the point of view of pluralization).
However, they were observing that the core concept of the procedure centered on the idea of recording information about "treatments" of objects, whether for conservation analysis, or other purposes.
So...how about Treatments?
John
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Peter Murray <pmurray@chillco.commailto:pmurray@chillco.com> wrote:
Hey Ray,
This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
Peter
On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee <rhlee@berkeley.edumailto:rhlee@berkeley.edu> wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements), and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of "conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so is just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.orgmailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.orgmailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
Let's not go with "treatment" just because it is easier to pluralize. I think Megan and other members of the Functional Working Group should comment?
________________________________
From: Talk <talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org> on behalf of John B Lowe <jblowe@berkeley.edu>
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 10:12 AM
To: Peter Murray
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
I overheard Al and Michael talking about what would actually be going into the procedure, and related procedures, such as Analysis (which has problems of its own from the point of view of pluralization).
However, they were observing that the core concept of the procedure centered on the idea of recording information about "treatments" of objects, whether for conservation analysis, or other purposes.
So...how about Treatments?
John
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Peter Murray <pmurray@chillco.com<mailto:pmurray@chillco.com>> wrote:
Hey Ray,
This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
Peter
On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee <rhlee@berkeley.edu<mailto:rhlee@berkeley.edu>> wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements), and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of "conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so is just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
_______________________________________________
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org<mailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org>
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company
_______________________________________________
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org<mailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org>
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
JB
John B Lowe
Fri, Nov 6, 2015 4:34 PM
I submit it's BOTH easier to pluralize AND more accurate as a description
of the procedure.
But yes, the thoughts of the functional working group and potential users
of the procedure should carry the real weight!
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Richard Millet richard.millet@lyrasis.org
wrote:
Let's not go with "treatment" just because it is easier to pluralize. I
think Megan and other members of the Functional Working Group should
comment?
From: Talk talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org on behalf of John B
Lowe jblowe@berkeley.edu
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 10:12 AM
To: Peter Murray
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
I overheard Al and Michael talking about what would actually be going into
the procedure, and related procedures, such as Analysis (which has problems
of its own from the point of view of pluralization).
However, they were observing that the core concept of the procedure
centered on the idea of recording information about "treatments" of
objects, whether for conservation analysis, or other purposes.
So...how about Treatments?
John
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Peter Murray pmurray@chillco.com wrote:
Hey Ray,
This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive
to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities
realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
Peter
On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee rhlee@berkeley.edu wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (
https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements),
and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in
the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement
procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a
countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you
wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over
there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of
"conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so
is just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
I submit it's BOTH easier to pluralize AND more accurate as a description
of the procedure.
But yes, the thoughts of the functional working group and potential users
of the procedure should carry the real weight!
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Richard Millet <richard.millet@lyrasis.org>
wrote:
> Let's not go with "treatment" just because it is easier to pluralize. I
> think Megan and other members of the Functional Working Group should
> comment?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Talk <talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org> on behalf of John B
> Lowe <jblowe@berkeley.edu>
> *Sent:* Friday, November 06, 2015 10:12 AM
> *To:* Peter Murray
> *Cc:* CollectionSpace Talk List
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
>
> I overheard Al and Michael talking about what would actually be going into
> the procedure, and related procedures, such as Analysis (which has problems
> of its own from the point of view of pluralization).
>
> However, they were observing that the core concept of the procedure
> centered on the idea of recording information about "treatments" of
> objects, whether for conservation analysis, or other purposes.
>
> So...how about Treatments?
>
> John
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Peter Murray <pmurray@chillco.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey Ray,
>>
>> This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive
>> to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities
>> realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
>>
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee <rhlee@berkeley.edu> wrote:
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>> I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (
>> https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements),
>> and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in
>> the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement
>> procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
>>
>> Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a
>> countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you
>> wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over
>> there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of
>> "conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so
>> is just conservation ok?
>>
>> Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ray
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk mailing list
>> Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
>>
>> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Peter Murray
>> Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
>> Cherry Hill Company
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk mailing list
>> Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
>>
>> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
>>
>>
>
MB
Michael Black
Fri, Nov 6, 2015 4:52 PM
Functional Working Group member chiming in. When I first saw Ray's question
last night, going with "treatment(s)" was the option that first occurred to
me. Even the analysis that would be documented on this procedure (well,
most of it—see further below) would be done within the scope of a
treatment.
But then I spoke with one of our conservators just now and went over the
data map with her (see PAHMA-1402
https://issues.collectionspace.org/browse/PAHMA-1402), and she said that
since destructive analysis was included, and destructive analysis would
often just be documented in this procedure without any accompanying
treatment, it would be inaccurate to call the whole procedure a treatment
procedure.
So as much as I like going with "treatment/treatments", it looks like
"conservation/conservation" is the better choice.
Michael
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Richard Millet richard.millet@lyrasis.org
wrote:
Let's not go with "treatment" just because it is easier to pluralize. I
think Megan and other members of the Functional Working Group should
comment?
From: Talk talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org on behalf of John B
Lowe jblowe@berkeley.edu
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 10:12 AM
To: Peter Murray
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
I overheard Al and Michael talking about what would actually be going into
the procedure, and related procedures, such as Analysis (which has problems
of its own from the point of view of pluralization).
However, they were observing that the core concept of the procedure
centered on the idea of recording information about "treatments" of
objects, whether for conservation analysis, or other purposes.
So...how about Treatments?
John
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Peter Murray pmurray@chillco.com wrote:
Hey Ray,
This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive
to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities
realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
Peter
On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee rhlee@berkeley.edu wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (
https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements),
and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in
the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement
procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a
countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you
wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over
there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of
"conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so
is just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
Functional Working Group member chiming in. When I first saw Ray's question
last night, going with "treatment(s)" was the option that first occurred to
me. Even the analysis that would be documented on this procedure (well,
most of it—see further below) would be done within the scope of a
treatment.
But then I spoke with one of our conservators just now and went over the
data map with her (see PAHMA-1402
<https://issues.collectionspace.org/browse/PAHMA-1402>), and she said that
since destructive analysis was included, and destructive analysis would
often just be documented in this procedure without any accompanying
treatment, it would be inaccurate to call the whole procedure a treatment
procedure.
So as much as I like going with "treatment/treatments", it looks like
"conservation/conservation" is the better choice.
Michael
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Richard Millet <richard.millet@lyrasis.org>
wrote:
> Let's not go with "treatment" just because it is easier to pluralize. I
> think Megan and other members of the Functional Working Group should
> comment?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Talk <talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org> on behalf of John B
> Lowe <jblowe@berkeley.edu>
> *Sent:* Friday, November 06, 2015 10:12 AM
> *To:* Peter Murray
> *Cc:* CollectionSpace Talk List
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
>
> I overheard Al and Michael talking about what would actually be going into
> the procedure, and related procedures, such as Analysis (which has problems
> of its own from the point of view of pluralization).
>
> However, they were observing that the core concept of the procedure
> centered on the idea of recording information about "treatments" of
> objects, whether for conservation analysis, or other purposes.
>
> So...how about Treatments?
>
> John
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Peter Murray <pmurray@chillco.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey Ray,
>>
>> This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive
>> to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities
>> realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
>>
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee <rhlee@berkeley.edu> wrote:
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>> I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (
>> https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements),
>> and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in
>> the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement
>> procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
>>
>> Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a
>> countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you
>> wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over
>> there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of
>> "conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so
>> is just conservation ok?
>>
>> Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ray
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk mailing list
>> Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
>>
>> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Peter Murray
>> Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
>> Cherry Hill Company
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk mailing list
>> Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
>>
>> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk mailing list
> Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
>
> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
>
>
--
Michael Black, Ph.D.
Head of Research and Information
Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology
University of California, Berkeley
mtblack@berkeley.edu
<http://biggive.berkeley.edu>
MF
Megan Forbes
Fri, Nov 6, 2015 4:56 PM
Seconding conservation/conservation. The backend name does show up on the front end, and if it doesn't match the procedure name it can be confusing - a la "movement" being the name in the permissions list for the Location procedure.
If we agree that the procedure is Conservation, let's be consistent with that.
Megan Forbes
CollectionSpace Community Outreach and Support Manager
megan.forbes@lyrasis.org
800.999.8558 x 2917 Main
917.267.9676 Cell
meganbforbes Skype
From: Talk talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org on behalf of Michael Black mtblack@berkeley.edu
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 11:52 AM
To: Richard Millet
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
Functional Working Group member chiming in. When I first saw Ray's question last night, going with "treatment(s)" was the option that first occurred to me. Even the analysis that would be documented on this procedure (well, most of it—see further below) would be done within the scope of a treatment.
But then I spoke with one of our conservators just now and went over the data map with her (see PAHMA-1402https://issues.collectionspace.org/browse/PAHMA-1402), and she said that since destructive analysis was included, and destructive analysis would often just be documented in this procedure without any accompanying treatment, it would be inaccurate to call the whole procedure a treatment procedure.
So as much as I like going with "treatment/treatments", it looks like "conservation/conservation" is the better choice.
Michael
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Richard Millet <richard.millet@lyrasis.orgmailto:richard.millet@lyrasis.org> wrote:
Let's not go with "treatment" just because it is easier to pluralize. I think Megan and other members of the Functional Working Group should comment?
From: Talk <talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.orgmailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org> on behalf of John B Lowe <jblowe@berkeley.edumailto:jblowe@berkeley.edu>
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 10:12 AM
To: Peter Murray
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
I overheard Al and Michael talking about what would actually be going into the procedure, and related procedures, such as Analysis (which has problems of its own from the point of view of pluralization).
However, they were observing that the core concept of the procedure centered on the idea of recording information about "treatments" of objects, whether for conservation analysis, or other purposes.
So...how about Treatments?
John
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Peter Murray <pmurray@chillco.commailto:pmurray@chillco.com> wrote:
Hey Ray,
This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
Peter
On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee <rhlee@berkeley.edumailto:rhlee@berkeley.edu> wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements), and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of "conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so is just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.orgmailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.orgmailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.orgmailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Michael Black, Ph.D.
Head of Research and Information
Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology
University of California, Berkeley
mtblack@berkeley.edumailto:mtblack@berkeley.edu
[https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B0XpjHs2G_OIRUJIODVtSTdIS2M&revid=0B0XpjHs2G_OIOWlzNEgzM0w3YjNzREZQVERQL3R4VXFKNTNvPQ]http://biggive.berkeley.edu
Seconding conservation/conservation. The backend name does show up on the front end, and if it doesn't match the procedure name it can be confusing - a la "movement" being the name in the permissions list for the Location procedure.
If we agree that the procedure is Conservation, let's be consistent with that.
Megan Forbes
CollectionSpace Community Outreach and Support Manager
megan.forbes@lyrasis.org
800.999.8558 x 2917 Main
917.267.9676 Cell
meganbforbes Skype
________________________________
From: Talk <talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org> on behalf of Michael Black <mtblack@berkeley.edu>
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 11:52 AM
To: Richard Millet
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
Functional Working Group member chiming in. When I first saw Ray's question last night, going with "treatment(s)" was the option that first occurred to me. Even the analysis that would be documented on this procedure (well, most of it—see further below) would be done within the scope of a treatment.
But then I spoke with one of our conservators just now and went over the data map with her (see PAHMA-1402<https://issues.collectionspace.org/browse/PAHMA-1402>), and she said that since destructive analysis was included, and destructive analysis would often just be documented in this procedure without any accompanying treatment, it would be inaccurate to call the whole procedure a treatment procedure.
So as much as I like going with "treatment/treatments", it looks like "conservation/conservation" is the better choice.
Michael
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Richard Millet <richard.millet@lyrasis.org<mailto:richard.millet@lyrasis.org>> wrote:
Let's not go with "treatment" just because it is easier to pluralize. I think Megan and other members of the Functional Working Group should comment?
________________________________
From: Talk <talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org<mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org>> on behalf of John B Lowe <jblowe@berkeley.edu<mailto:jblowe@berkeley.edu>>
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 10:12 AM
To: Peter Murray
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
I overheard Al and Michael talking about what would actually be going into the procedure, and related procedures, such as Analysis (which has problems of its own from the point of view of pluralization).
However, they were observing that the core concept of the procedure centered on the idea of recording information about "treatments" of objects, whether for conservation analysis, or other purposes.
So...how about Treatments?
John
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Peter Murray <pmurray@chillco.com<mailto:pmurray@chillco.com>> wrote:
Hey Ray,
This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
Peter
On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee <rhlee@berkeley.edu<mailto:rhlee@berkeley.edu>> wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements), and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of "conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so is just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
_______________________________________________
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org<mailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org>
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company
_______________________________________________
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org<mailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org>
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
_______________________________________________
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org<mailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org>
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Michael Black, Ph.D.
Head of Research and Information
Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology
University of California, Berkeley
mtblack@berkeley.edu<mailto:mtblack@berkeley.edu>
[https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B0XpjHs2G_OIRUJIODVtSTdIS2M&revid=0B0XpjHs2G_OIOWlzNEgzM0w3YjNzREZQVERQL3R4VXFKNTNvPQ]<http://biggive.berkeley.edu>
RM
Richard Millet
Fri, Nov 6, 2015 5:24 PM
Also seconding conservation/conservation. Megan's original wiki page (created back in 2009, wow) supports Michael's argument. Also, SPECTRUM (which we use as a guide to CollectionSpace's functionality) seems to indicate "conservation" is a good choice.
Thanks everyone for chiming in!
From: Megan Forbes
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 10:56 AM
To: Michael Black; Richard Millet
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
Seconding conservation/conservation. The backend name does show up on the front end, and if it doesn't match the procedure name it can be confusing - a la "movement" being the name in the permissions list for the Location procedure.
If we agree that the procedure is Conservation, let's be consistent with that.
Megan Forbes
CollectionSpace Community Outreach and Support Manager
megan.forbes@lyrasis.org
800.999.8558 x 2917 Main
917.267.9676 Cell
meganbforbes Skype
From: Talk talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org on behalf of Michael Black mtblack@berkeley.edu
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 11:52 AM
To: Richard Millet
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
Functional Working Group member chiming in. When I first saw Ray's question last night, going with "treatment(s)" was the option that first occurred to me. Even the analysis that would be documented on this procedure (well, most of it—see further below) would be done within the scope of a treatment.
But then I spoke with one of our conservators just now and went over the data map with her (see PAHMA-1402https://issues.collectionspace.org/browse/PAHMA-1402), and she said that since destructive analysis was included, and destructive analysis would often just be documented in this procedure without any accompanying treatment, it would be inaccurate to call the whole procedure a treatment procedure.
So as much as I like going with "treatment/treatments", it looks like "conservation/conservation" is the better choice.
Michael
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Richard Millet <richard.millet@lyrasis.orgmailto:richard.millet@lyrasis.org> wrote:
Let's not go with "treatment" just because it is easier to pluralize. I think Megan and other members of the Functional Working Group should comment?
From: Talk <talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.orgmailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org> on behalf of John B Lowe <jblowe@berkeley.edumailto:jblowe@berkeley.edu>
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 10:12 AM
To: Peter Murray
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
I overheard Al and Michael talking about what would actually be going into the procedure, and related procedures, such as Analysis (which has problems of its own from the point of view of pluralization).
However, they were observing that the core concept of the procedure centered on the idea of recording information about "treatments" of objects, whether for conservation analysis, or other purposes.
So...how about Treatments?
John
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Peter Murray <pmurray@chillco.commailto:pmurray@chillco.com> wrote:
Hey Ray,
This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
Peter
On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee <rhlee@berkeley.edumailto:rhlee@berkeley.edu> wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements), and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of "conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so is just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.orgmailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.orgmailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.orgmailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Michael Black, Ph.D.
Head of Research and Information
Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology
University of California, Berkeley
mtblack@berkeley.edumailto:mtblack@berkeley.edu
[https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B0XpjHs2G_OIRUJIODVtSTdIS2M&revid=0B0XpjHs2G_OIOWlzNEgzM0w3YjNzREZQVERQL3R4VXFKNTNvPQ]http://biggive.berkeley.edu
Also seconding conservation/conservation. Megan's original wiki page (created back in 2009, wow) supports Michael's argument. Also, SPECTRUM (which we use as a guide to CollectionSpace's functionality) seems to indicate "conservation" is a good choice.
Thanks everyone for chiming in!
________________________________
From: Megan Forbes
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 10:56 AM
To: Michael Black; Richard Millet
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
Seconding conservation/conservation. The backend name does show up on the front end, and if it doesn't match the procedure name it can be confusing - a la "movement" being the name in the permissions list for the Location procedure.
If we agree that the procedure is Conservation, let's be consistent with that.
Megan Forbes
CollectionSpace Community Outreach and Support Manager
megan.forbes@lyrasis.org
800.999.8558 x 2917 Main
917.267.9676 Cell
meganbforbes Skype
________________________________
From: Talk <talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org> on behalf of Michael Black <mtblack@berkeley.edu>
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 11:52 AM
To: Richard Millet
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
Functional Working Group member chiming in. When I first saw Ray's question last night, going with "treatment(s)" was the option that first occurred to me. Even the analysis that would be documented on this procedure (well, most of it—see further below) would be done within the scope of a treatment.
But then I spoke with one of our conservators just now and went over the data map with her (see PAHMA-1402<https://issues.collectionspace.org/browse/PAHMA-1402>), and she said that since destructive analysis was included, and destructive analysis would often just be documented in this procedure without any accompanying treatment, it would be inaccurate to call the whole procedure a treatment procedure.
So as much as I like going with "treatment/treatments", it looks like "conservation/conservation" is the better choice.
Michael
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Richard Millet <richard.millet@lyrasis.org<mailto:richard.millet@lyrasis.org>> wrote:
Let's not go with "treatment" just because it is easier to pluralize. I think Megan and other members of the Functional Working Group should comment?
________________________________
From: Talk <talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org<mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org>> on behalf of John B Lowe <jblowe@berkeley.edu<mailto:jblowe@berkeley.edu>>
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 10:12 AM
To: Peter Murray
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
I overheard Al and Michael talking about what would actually be going into the procedure, and related procedures, such as Analysis (which has problems of its own from the point of view of pluralization).
However, they were observing that the core concept of the procedure centered on the idea of recording information about "treatments" of objects, whether for conservation analysis, or other purposes.
So...how about Treatments?
John
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Peter Murray <pmurray@chillco.com<mailto:pmurray@chillco.com>> wrote:
Hey Ray,
This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
Peter
On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee <rhlee@berkeley.edu<mailto:rhlee@berkeley.edu>> wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements), and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of "conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so is just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
_______________________________________________
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org<mailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org>
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company
_______________________________________________
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org<mailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org>
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
_______________________________________________
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org<mailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org>
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Michael Black, Ph.D.
Head of Research and Information
Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology
University of California, Berkeley
mtblack@berkeley.edu<mailto:mtblack@berkeley.edu>
[https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B0XpjHs2G_OIRUJIODVtSTdIS2M&revid=0B0XpjHs2G_OIOWlzNEgzM0w3YjNzREZQVERQL3R4VXFKNTNvPQ]<http://biggive.berkeley.edu>
SS
Susan STONE
Fri, Nov 6, 2015 6:30 PM
One voice from the technical side: too late now (media/medias etc.) but I
do wish these things were consistent where they show up in the back end
schemas.
Susan
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Richard Millet richard.millet@lyrasis.org
wrote:
Also seconding conservation/conservation. Megan's original wiki page
(created back in 2009, wow) supports Michael's argument. Also, SPECTRUM
(which we use as a guide to CollectionSpace's functionality) seems to
indicate "conservation" is a good choice.
Thanks everyone for chiming in!
From: Megan Forbes
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 10:56 AM
To: Michael Black; Richard Millet
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
Seconding conservation/conservation. The backend name does show up on the
front end, and if it doesn't match the procedure name it can be confusing -
a la "movement" being the name in the permissions list for the Location
procedure.
If we agree that the procedure is Conservation, let's be consistent with
that.
Megan Forbes
CollectionSpace Community Outreach and Support Manager
megan.forbes@lyrasis.org megan.forbes@lyrasis.org
800.999.8558 x 2917 Main
917.267.9676 Cell
meganbforbes Skype
From: Talk talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org on behalf of
Michael Black mtblack@berkeley.edu
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 11:52 AM
To: Richard Millet
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
Functional Working Group member chiming in. When I first saw Ray's
question last night, going with "treatment(s)" was the option that first
occurred to me. Even the analysis that would be documented on this
procedure (well, most of it—see further below) would be done within the
scope of a treatment.
But then I spoke with one of our conservators just now and went over the
data map with her (see PAHMA-1402
https://issues.collectionspace.org/browse/PAHMA-1402), and she said
that since destructive analysis was included, and destructive analysis
would often just be documented in this procedure without any accompanying
treatment, it would be inaccurate to call the whole procedure a treatment
procedure.
So as much as I like going with "treatment/treatments", it looks like
"conservation/conservation" is the better choice.
Michael
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Richard Millet <richard.millet@lyrasis.org
Let's not go with "treatment" just because it is easier to pluralize. I
think Megan and other members of the Functional Working Group should
comment?
From: Talk talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org on behalf of John
B Lowe jblowe@berkeley.edu
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 10:12 AM
To: Peter Murray
Cc: CollectionSpace Talk List
Subject: Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
I overheard Al and Michael talking about what would actually be going
into the procedure, and related procedures, such as Analysis (which has
problems of its own from the point of view of pluralization).
However, they were observing that the core concept of the procedure
centered on the idea of recording information about "treatments" of
objects, whether for conservation analysis, or other purposes.
So...how about Treatments?
John
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Peter Murray pmurray@chillco.com wrote:
Hey Ray,
This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive
to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities
realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
Peter
On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee rhlee@berkeley.edu wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (
https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements),
and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in
the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement
procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a
countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you
wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over
there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of
"conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so
is just conservation ok?
Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
Thanks,
Ray
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
--
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
One voice from the technical side: too late now (media/medias etc.) but I
do wish these things were consistent where they show up in the back end
schemas.
Susan
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Richard Millet <richard.millet@lyrasis.org>
wrote:
> Also seconding conservation/conservation. Megan's original wiki page
> (created back in 2009, wow) supports Michael's argument. Also, SPECTRUM
> (which we use as a guide to CollectionSpace's functionality) seems to
> indicate "conservation" is a good choice.
>
>
> Thanks everyone for chiming in!
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Megan Forbes
> *Sent:* Friday, November 06, 2015 10:56 AM
> *To:* Michael Black; Richard Millet
> *Cc:* CollectionSpace Talk List
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
>
>
> Seconding conservation/conservation. The backend name does show up on the
> front end, and if it doesn't match the procedure name it can be confusing -
> a la "movement" being the name in the permissions list for the Location
> procedure.
>
>
> If we agree that the procedure is Conservation, let's be consistent with
> that.
>
>
>
>
> Megan Forbes
> CollectionSpace Community Outreach and Support Manager
> *megan.forbes@lyrasis.org <megan.forbes@lyrasis.org>*
> 800.999.8558 x 2917 Main
> 917.267.9676 Cell
> meganbforbes Skype
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Talk <talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org> on behalf of
> Michael Black <mtblack@berkeley.edu>
> *Sent:* Friday, November 6, 2015 11:52 AM
> *To:* Richard Millet
> *Cc:* CollectionSpace Talk List
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
>
> Functional Working Group member chiming in. When I first saw Ray's
> question last night, going with "treatment(s)" was the option that first
> occurred to me. Even the analysis that would be documented on this
> procedure (well, most of it—see further below) would be done within the
> scope of a treatment.
>
> But then I spoke with one of our conservators just now and went over the
> data map with her (see PAHMA-1402
> <https://issues.collectionspace.org/browse/PAHMA-1402>), and she said
> that since destructive analysis was included, and destructive analysis
> would often just be documented in this procedure without any accompanying
> treatment, it would be inaccurate to call the whole procedure a treatment
> procedure.
>
> So as much as I like going with "treatment/treatments", it looks like
> "conservation/conservation" is the better choice.
>
> Michael
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Richard Millet <richard.millet@lyrasis.org
> > wrote:
>
>> Let's not go with "treatment" just because it is easier to pluralize. I
>> think Megan and other members of the Functional Working Group should
>> comment?
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Talk <talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org> on behalf of John
>> B Lowe <jblowe@berkeley.edu>
>> *Sent:* Friday, November 06, 2015 10:12 AM
>> *To:* Peter Murray
>> *Cc:* CollectionSpace Talk List
>> *Subject:* Re: [Talk] Conservation(s)?
>>
>> I overheard Al and Michael talking about what would actually be going
>> into the procedure, and related procedures, such as Analysis (which has
>> problems of its own from the point of view of pluralization).
>>
>> However, they were observing that the core concept of the procedure
>> centered on the idea of recording information about "treatments" of
>> objects, whether for conservation analysis, or other purposes.
>>
>> So...how about Treatments?
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Peter Murray <pmurray@chillco.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Ray,
>>>
>>> This is one of the things that has tripped me up, so I'm quite sensitive
>>> to it. (Ran up against 'org' versus 'organization' in the authorities
>>> realm last week.) How about using 'treatment/treatments' instead?
>>>
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> On Nov 5, 2015, at 8:56 PM, Ray Lee <rhlee@berkeley.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> I'm implementing the Conservation procedure (
>>> https://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Conservation+and+Collections+Care+Requirements),
>>> and I need to give it a service name. This is the string that appears in
>>> the services REST URL, and in schema names. For example, for the Movement
>>> procedure, /cspace-services/movements and movements_common.
>>>
>>> Usually, the service name is pluralized. But "conservation" isn't a
>>> countable thing, right? So it doesn't make sense to pluralize? Like, you
>>> wouldn't say "I did a conservation," or "there are three conservations over
>>> there." In this case "conservation" is really an abbreviation of
>>> "conservation treatment." And conservationtreatments seems too long, so
>>> is just conservation ok?
>>>
>>> Are there any rules about this? Opinions?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ray
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Talk mailing list
>>> Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
>>>
>>> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Peter Murray
>>> Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
>>> Cherry Hill Company
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Talk mailing list
>>> Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
>>>
>>> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk mailing list
>> Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
>>
>> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Michael Black, Ph.D.
> Head of Research and Information
> Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology
> University of California, Berkeley
> mtblack@berkeley.edu
>
> <http://biggive.berkeley.edu>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk mailing list
> Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
>
> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
>
>
