Dear all
Geoffrey Yeo's contribution to this debate is helpful but I would just like to comment on this bit of his message:
"Automated systems might be expected to provide us with a solution [to the problem of material which could be classed as archive and/or MS], but to date most systems have been developed to meet the perceived needs of a single profession, and the opportunity to address the wider issue has been largely ignored."
Automated description can hardly be expected to solve a conceptual problem, being only a tool and not a mechanism of making our professional decisions. It is unsurprising that most such systems have been developed for use by one custodial profession (excellent phrase) only, since they tend to address issues important to that profession and be largely used by that profession. Although anyone out there who has used systems based on the library/MSS framework of AACR2 and MARC may have points to make about the way those standards (and perhaps we should think about standards rather than computing here) deal with archival and/or museum concepts.
However I do endorse Geoffrey's point about the desirability of professional dialogue on these matters. It may be that the new cultural consortia proposed by the present government will allow archivists to take the lead as he suggests, on these and on other matters of common concern.
Sarah
******
Sarah J A Flynn
Archivist (Historical Records)
Information Management and Analysis
Glaxo Wellcome plc
891-995 Greenford Road
Greenford
Middlesex UB6 0HE
UK
Direct line: 711 2395 / (+44) -181 966 2395
Fax: 711 2240 / (+44) -181 966 2240
Email: [log in to unmask]
******
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|