Having read David and Pam's messages I thought it might be useful to list members to
say that I have been asked to be a member of the 1901 Project's advisory committee. At
the 'kick-off' meeting the week before last, I did indeed raise the concerns about
people wishing to utilise material for whole communities rather than single person
searchers. This is being thought about. Our next meeting is on 1st March and I will be
happy to raise and pass on any concerns that members of this list wish to raise. I will
do my best to keep the list infomed of developments, all I can say at this stage (as
the details of the project are commercial-in-confidence) is that there are a lot of
rumours, some of which are ill-formed.
Please pass on any concerns/queries to me at
[log in to unmask]
Thanks
Kevin Schurer
On Mon, 31 Jan 2000 08:44:52 +0000 (GMT Standard Time) David Gatley
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I've had some muddled emails concerning the availability of
> the 1901 CEBs.
>
> Apparently, these are to be both microfilmed and scanned
> into digital form.
>
> However, my impression is that the digital version of the
> film will only be available for a charge of 80p per page,
> which I find outrageous. Most family historians like to
> place there own work into context i.e. they like to view
> their family in its wider local setting.
>
> I understand that special provisions are to be made for
> academics and that libraries and other bodies can still buy
> microfiche copies. But, they will NOT BE SOLD TO
> INDIVIDUALS and one wonders how many libraries will buy the
> CEBs on film?
>
> MY concern is that, LOCAL HISTORY IS A FIELD WHERE THE
> AMATEUR CAN DOES MAKE A VERY IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTION. Such
> proposals will therefore be bad for those studying local
> history. I find the proposals, if true, to be intolerable.
>
> David Alan Gatley (Dr)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|