Hello again all,

In today's thread I'd like to consult you on the different options that exist for developing a standard covering grey literature reports.

In the file archive (www.fish-forum.info > 'download files' > HEGEL Project > 'P5 Approchaes to Developing the HEGEL standard' ) I present four approaches.

Developed by a consortium in the sector;

Developed by English Heritage for the sector;

Developed by the British Standards Institute as a consultant;

Developed by the BSI themselves.

As with any project outcome, each different approach can be considered against three key criteria: cost, time to deliver, and quality. I'd like your thoughts in particular on the main aspect of Quality that I've considered here which is Acceptability to the sector. A standard such as this will only be of any value if it is acceptable to a broad range of participants. Acceptability clearly covers a range of topics, and I'd welcome your thoughts. I think we've identified two or three so far, as follows:-

- it must be valued by planning specialists as well as heritage specialists to be applied

- it must not add to the burden of quality control work that falls on the curators in local govt

- it must work with existing S&G

but please add to the list.

One point on cost. There is I believe a very strong resistance to paying for published standards in the sector. This is in contrast to related sector such as the construction industry. I feel this is understandable, but is it sustainable in the long-term? A BSI standard will typically cost less than say a low-end spec SLR digital camera - often a lot less. For those who don't want to or can not pay, the public library service can provide access to any published work. But what are your thoughts?

I may not be able to respond much today, but I'll catch up tommorrow. My thanks to all of you who have commented so far.

With all good wishes

Ed