Something's been bugging me about this discussion. Lots of good info and
back & forth but there was something under the surface I just couldn't quite
reach. I think Stephen's message finally brought it forth. 

If you have a record you need to keep for 300 years, I don't think it *can*
have historical value in the traditional historical/archival sense. Why?
Because in all likelihood it will need to be migrated multiple times over
its lifespan. 

There have been a number of historical exceptions cited in the discussion -
Constitution, etc., and all of them are valid. But we don't do stuff on
parchment or vellum or leather any more - we do it on relatively cheap paper
with cheap ink or even cheaper laser toner. And don't get me started on
born-digital records - it is plain to me that there is no such thing as a
digital record with intrinsic historical value other than the value of the
technical solution (the compression mechanism, the use of an extremely
unusual programming language or coding technique, the first Java applet to
run on the web, etc.). In other words, the analogy in paper records would be
to save different types of paper. The accessible lifespan of digital records
is just too short to rise to what I would consider historical or archival
value without having it migrated many times, thereby contradicting its
"historicalness". 

Even if a given record is created on archival paper with archival inks and a
silver halide microfilm backup, what's the odds on it being stored in
appropriate conditions for 300+ years? Not to disparage anyone here,
particularly if this is part of your job, but I just don't see it except by
sheer lucky exception. Your 8 successors (assuming you all work 40 years
each) are not all going to do all of the things that would be required to
keep stuff long enough in a single format for it to reach historical value. 

I guess what I mean by all of this is that I am considering a separation
between the informational/operational value of the information and its value
as a historical artifact, and I am asserting that for records created today
there is an almost infinitesimal chance of one lasting long enough for it to
cross that boundary regardless of physical or logical medium. The original
Constitution hanging in Constitution Hall does not have informational value
today - the Supreme Court doesn't go read that specific original in making
its decisions (and no political commentary please!). It has historical value
because it has managed to survive more than 200 years. I know we have the
theoretical capacity for doing so with other (physical) records today, I
just doubt our ability to do all the things required of it for 300 years. 

Respectfully submitted on behalf of myself and no other company,
organization, association, entity, or board of directors,

Jesse Wilkins, CRM, CDIA+, ecmm, emmm, ermm
[log in to unmask] 
(303) 574-0749 direct
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/jessewilkins 

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]