RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Hilliard, Mary" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 25 Jan 2011 10:12:34 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (16 lines)
Beatrice Williams, in regard to assigning an date for the retention field for permanent records asked - " Do InfoTech (IT) have a logical argument? "

Beatrice,

At a previous employer, we dealt with a similar situation by assigning a date of 99/99/9999, using that date both for "permanent" records and for event-based active records.(using a null value didn't work because the underlying SQL queries would not work properly).

This worked very well for both instances since it allowed the "trigger" date for disposition to be assigned to the event based records only after the occurrence of the triggering event.

Mary Hilliard, CRM
[log in to unmask]

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]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2