As an archivist I have followed this discussion with interest. Don't forget
that the quality of the storage conditions (especially temperature and
humidity - see BS 5454 for example) are even more important that the quality
of the storage media!
Gillian Sheldrick
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Millard [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 24 January 2001 12:52
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Digital Data Practice Standard & Guidance
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001, Janet Davis wrote:
> Of course paper records should be kept. At present, they are a proven
> form of stable long-term storage for information.
This seems to be a widespread assumption in this discussion, but I am not
sure that it is true for the mass-produced "office quality" paper that we
use everyday. I have photocopies on this type of paper which were made in
the mid-1980s, and they are yellowing at an alarming rate, and certainly
faster than documents from the 1930s to 1960s that I have used. If a
paper archive is to be long term and stable then we must be careful NOT to
use modern mass-produced high-acid paper, but ensure that it is on
archival quality paper which is not going to eat itself within decades via
its own acid content.
I suspect that sooner rather than later we are going to find that paper
records need to be "migrated" before they become unreadable.
As a consumer of the types of archives being discussed I would like to see
standards encompassing both paper and digital archives which specify
the media/formats most conducive to long term preservation and
accessibility.
Andrew
=========================================================================
Dr. Andrew Millard [log in to unmask]
Department of Archaeology, University of Durham, Tel: +44 191 374 4757
South Road, Durham. DH1 3LE. United Kingdom. Fax: +44 191 374 3619
http://www.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/
=========================================================================
|