Not sure I agree that 'US DOD 5015.2 is not very appropriate in a UK
setting'
It is a standard for an EDRMS set down for use by all US government (esp.
Military) departments and as such would provide a more than useful guide to
what such a system should be capable of.
Systems that are certified to DoD5015.2 have demonstrated an ability to meet
an extremely demanding standard (Declaration of interest - ours is!)
Best Regards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------
Geoff Baldwin dir:
01428 647 577
Business Development Director m: 07717 478 422
dotDOCs Ltd web:
www.dotDOCs.co.uk
Longdene House
Haslemere
GU27 2PH
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: The UK Records Management mailing list
>>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
>>Fresko, Marc
>>Sent: 22 September 2004 22:42
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Re: EDRMS
>>
>>
>>Rachael
>>
>>To an extent Jesse's advice is correct - you should use a
>>publicly-available and well-regarded specification as a
>>starting point, rather than a specification of unknown
>>quality from elsewhere. However, US DOD 5015.2 is not very
>>appropriate in a UK setting, and I suggest you do not devote
>>any time to it.
>>
>>In the UK, MoReq is regarded as easier to work with (simply
>>because of the way in which it is written), BUT all UK
>>software suppliers are more familiar and more comfortable
>>with the PRO specification. MoReq is totally generic,
>>whereas the PRO specification is intended first and foremost
>>for UK central government (very similar in most significant
>>respects to local government for these purposes). I'd advise
>>you use the PRO 2002 specification, possibly looking at MoReq
>>for additional insights only if you have time.
>>
>>So, in a nutshell, take the PRO work, cut out all the
>>requirements you do not and are never likely to need, add any
>>requirements which you need but which are missing
>>(highlighting that you have added them, out of consideration
>>to the reader), and make all the general statements specific
>>to your authority.
>>
>>I hope this helps,
>>
>>Marc Fresko
>>EDM & ERM Consulting Services Director
>>Cornwell Management Consultants plc
>>Home Barn Court, The Street
>>Effingham, Surrey
>>KT24 5LG
>>
>>[log in to unmask]
>>Tel. 01372 456086
>>Mob. 07767 325630
>>Fax. 01372 450950
>>www.cornwell.co.uk
>>
>>This e-mail is intentionally sent in a plain text format, for
>>maximum compatibility with recipients' systems and minimum
>>virus infection risk.
>>
>>As this e-mail may contain confidential or privileged
>>information if you are not (or suspect that you are not) the
>>correct recipient or the person responsible for delivering
>>the message to one or more named addressees, please telephone
>>us immediately. Please note that we cannot guarantee that
>>this message or any attachment is virus free nor that it has
>>not been intercepted or amended. The views of the author may
>>not necessarily reflect those of the company.
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: The UK Records Management mailing list
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of JESSE
>>> WILKINS
>>> Sent: 22 September 2004 16:55
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: EDRMS
>>>
>>> Hi Rachael,
>>>
>>> Generically you may wish to consider the requirements
>>embodied in the
>>> Public Record Office spec, as well as those in MoReq or in
>>the US DOD
>>> 5015.2 - that should prove a good starting point from which you can
>>> customize to meet your requirements.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Jesse Wilkins
>>> CDIA+, LIT, EDP, ICP
>>> IMERGE Consulting
>>> (303) 574-1455 office
>>> (303) 484-4142 fax
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> http://www.imergeconsult.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >From: "Steel, Rachael" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> >Reply-To: "Steel, Rachael" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> >To: [log in to unmask]
>>> >Subject: EDRMS
>>> >Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 15:48:21 +0100
>>> >
>>> >Does any one have a Spec for an Electronic Document Records
>>> Management
>>> >System (EDRMS) that they are willing to share with me. We
>>have been
>>> >asked to create one for this authority at very short
>>notice and I do
>>> >not know where to start.
>>> >
>>> >Thanks very much and I look forward to any replies.
>>> >
>>> >Rachael Steel
>>> >Information Management Officer
>>> >Telephone: 01375 652500
>>> >[log in to unmask]
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >The information in this e-Mail and any attachment(s) are
>>> intended to be
>>> >confidential and may be legally privileged. Access to and
>>use of its
>>> >content by anyone else other than the addressee(s) may be
>>> unlawful and
>>> >will not be recognised by Thurrock Council for business purposes.
>>> >Thurrock Council cannot accept any responsibility for the
>>> accuracy or
>>> >completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over
>>> a public network.
>>> >
>>> >Any opinions expressed in this document are those of the
>>> author and do
>>> >not necessarily reflect the opinions of Thurrock Council.
>>> >
>>> >Any attachment(s) to this message has been checked for
>>viruses, but
>>> >please rely on your own virus checker and procedures.
>>> >
>>> >If you contact us by e-mail, we will store your name and
>>address to
>>> >facilitate communications.
>>>
>>>____________________________________________________________________
>>> >This message has been checked for all known viruses by the
>>> MessageLabs
>>> >Virus Control Centre. For further information visit
>>> >http://www.messagelabs.com/stats.asp
>>>
>>
>>
|