[Archivesspace_Users_Group] Accruals/related accesions

[Olivia S Solis]

Hi Kari,

Thanks for the information! Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you
do create a related resource link in each accession to connect it to the
appropriate resource record.

There are instances where we want to know, for instance, which accession
were new in a given time period vs. ones that are not and so that is why
having this information would be useful. A user defined field could be a
possibility. When we were initially embarking on this ASpace journey, we
were resistant to user defined fields, but I've grown warmer to the idea.

Thanks again!
Olivia

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Kari R Smith <smithkr at mit.edu> wrote:

> Olivia,
>
> Would it work to create a User Created data field in the Accession Record
> to note if the Accession is of TYPE= Accural or TYPE = Accession?  That
> would allow you to run reports on the differences but they would all be
> related to the Resource record for the overall collection.
>
>
>
> One thing we did when we were using ATK was to only refer back to the
> original Accession record when we needed to make the link between the
> record with certain data (for example, if there is a signed gift agreement)
> first accession record and the subsequent ones.  But we didn’t link all
> subsequent accession records to themselves.
>
>
>
> Kari R. Smith
>
> Digital Archivist and Program Head for Born-digital Archives
>
> Institute Archives and Special Collections
>
> Massachusetts Institute of Technology Libraries, Cambridge, Massachusetts
>
> 617.253.5690 <(617)%20253-5690>   smithkr at mit.edu
> http://libraries.mit.edu/archives/  @karirene69
>
>
>
> *From:* archivesspace_users_group-bounces at lyralists.lyrasis.org [mailto:
> archivesspace_users_group-bounces at lyralists.lyrasis.org] *On Behalf Of *Olivia
> S Solis
> *Sent:* Friday, March 31, 2017 10:06 AM
> *To:* Archivesspace Users Group <archivesspace_users_group@
> lyralists.lyrasis.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Accruals/related accesions
>
>
>
> Hi Kari,
>
>
>
> Our registrar determines this, but essentially we consider an accession
> that has the same creator and is the same resource type as an existing
> collection an accrual. Sometimes this is very obvious. For instance, we are
> the university archives (University of Texas) and regularly receive
> records/papers from departments and faculty. So if we have already received
> an accession from a particular professor, a new accession from him or her
> would be an accrual. If a professor sends materials to us for the first
> time, the accession is not an accrual, though any subsequent accessions
> he/she passes on would be.
>
>
>
> Most of the time, whether or not something is an accrual is clear to our
> registrar, but sometimes he has to do a little digging to see if an
> accession is an addition to an already existing collection.
>
>
>
> Does that make sense?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Olivia
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 8:32 AM, Kari R Smith <smithkr at mit.edu> wrote:
>
> Hi Olivia,
>
> Can you explain more about how you are distinguishing between accessions
> that are accruals from those that are not?
>
>
>
> Kari R. Smith
>
> Digital Archivist and Program Head for Born-digital Archives
>
> Institute Archives and Special Collections
>
> Massachusetts Institute of Technology Libraries, Cambridge, Massachusetts
>
> 617.253.5690 <(617)%20253-5690>   smithkr at mit.edu
> http://libraries.mit.edu/archives/  @karirene69
>
>
>
> *From:* archivesspace_users_group-bounces at lyralists.lyrasis.org [mailto:
> archivesspace_users_group-bounces at lyralists.lyrasis.org] *On Behalf Of *Olivia
> S Solis
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 30, 2017 2:06 PM
> *To:* Archivesspace Users Group <archivesspace_users_group@
> lyralists.lyrasis.org>
> *Subject:* [Archivesspace_Users_Group] Accruals/related accesions
>
>
>
> Hello all,
>
>
>
> We at the Briscoe are pretty far along the path to implementing ASpace,
> but have a number of unresolved issues. One being we are still figuring out
> how to deal with our accessions that are accruals. The Initially, we had
> thought to have all accessions in an accrual be related accessions with a
> sibling relationship. I ran a test with 3 collections: Collection 1,
> Collection 2, and Collection 3. Steps:
>
>
>
> 1) Link Collection 1 and Collection 2 as related accessions/siblings.
>
> 2) Link Collection 1 and Collection 3 as related accessions/siblings.
>
>
>
> My assumption was that Collection 2 and Collection 3 would automatically
> be related as siblings, but this was not the case. Is this behavior a known
> issue or is there some logic behind this? Am I missing something? I would
> think that ASpace would consider all the accessions in a daisy-chained
> series of siblings as siblings of each other. If this is not the case, the
> maintenance in connecting 20 related accessions/sibling records would be
> enormous.
>
>
>
> Nonetheless this led me to decide it might be better to have the first
> accession in the series of accruals be considered the parent and all the
> additional accessions be considered related accessions/forms part of the
> parent/first accrual. I ran another test:
>
>
>
> 1) Create Collection 4 and spawn an accession from it, Collection 5.
>
> 2) Connect the two as related accessions, with Collection 5 designated a
> child of Collection 4.
>
> 3) Spawn a resource from Collection 4, and check related accession.
>
>
>
> In the spawned resource, only Collection 4 was linked as a related
> accession in the newly spawned resource. I would have expected Collection 5
> to be linked as a related accession in the resource as well. Again, same
> question. Is this a known issue, or is there some logic behind this? We'd
> like to indicate all source accessions that are part of the accrual in the
> related resource records. It would seem like the related accessions should
> automatically funnel in as related accessions in the resource.
>
>
>
> How are some of you representing accruals in ArchivesSpace? Have you
> encountered any problems with your decisions, and did what was the logic of
> why you decided to go the route that you did?
>
>
>
> Thanks!!
>
> Olivia
>
>
>
> --
>
> Olivia Solis, MSIS
>
> Metadata Coordinator
>
> Dolph Briscoe Center for American History
>
> The University of Texas at Austin
>
> 2300 Red River St. Stop D1100
>
> Austin TX, 78712-1426
>
> (512) 232-8013 <(512)%20232-8013>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archivesspace_Users_Group mailing list
> Archivesspace_Users_Group at lyralists.lyrasis.org
> http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/mailman/listinfo/archivesspace_users_group
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Olivia Solis, MSIS
>
> Metadata Coordinator
>
> Dolph Briscoe Center for American History
>
> The University of Texas at Austin
>
> 2300 Red River St. Stop D1100
>
> Austin TX, 78712-1426
>
> (512) 232-8013 <(512)%20232-8013>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archivesspace_Users_Group mailing list
> Archivesspace_Users_Group at lyralists.lyrasis.org
> http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/mailman/listinfo/archivesspace_users_group
>
>


-- 
Olivia Solis, MSIS
Metadata Coordinator
Dolph Briscoe Center for American History
The University of Texas at Austin
2300 Red River St. Stop D1100
Austin TX, 78712-1426
(512) 232-8013
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/pipermail/archivesspace_users_group/attachments/20170331/b0514068/attachment.html>