Hello Chums,
Interesting point by Lawrence! Lets move wider. A document set that has importance and is updated on a regular basis are British Standards. I believe if legal process occurs then the standard that was current at the time the component was made or the buidling was constructed is deemed to be the appropriate version to consider. Retrospective compliance cannot sensibly be expected.
In the AACR2 / MARC 21 (Library cataloguing tools) sense a website is "published" as it is made available to a wider audience - via intranet or internet. "Documents" would need to be kept on a stand alone machine with no "net" connection before they could be considered "manuscript" or unpublished. Somebody captures a document and prints it out, files it, it may become considered a "record" in the legal sense no matter what the intention of the originating organisation / individual may have been.
Is it 12.00 yet?
Best wishes
Keith
Keith V. Trickey
School of Business Information
Liverpool John Moores University
----
From: The UK Records Management mailing list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Lawrence Serewicz
Sent: 01 April 2005 11:06
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Quick question...
David Thomas wrote:
"Nobody would now claim that a fifteenth century proclamation was not a public record just because it was printed, would they?"
I agree with the point, but it opens us up to the difference between a printed document and a webpage. As far as I know, the 15th century documents do not update themselves on a regular basis. If I access a web page in 2001 and again in 2005, is that the same webpage? If I access the treaty of Westphalia in 1900 or in 2001, it is the same treaty.
I would be curious to see if any webpage archives itself so that ANY changes to it are recorded and archived so that I can check the 2001 against the 2005. I can do that with printed documents.
It is Friday after all......
Lawrence W. Serewicz
Scrutiny Manager
Management Support Unit
Wear Valley District Council
01388-761-985
