Dear Jim & RIM Colleagues,

Jim Connelly makes the following statement in his post of the 14th March
2005 on the subject of BCS - Business Classification:

"The creation of a Business Classification Scheme (BCS) is first cab off the
rank. Before we can create a quality BCS we first must have a Controlled
Vocabulary (VC) or whatever term you prefer e.g. Thesaurus, Taxonomy or
Ontology or whatever appropriate terminology in place or that we apply, then
one can NEVER have a totally 100% effective and efficient Records and
Information Management (RIM) system that meets the requirements of the
International Records Management Standards ISO 15489 or World Best
Practice."

>I usually do agree with much of what you say but the above statement is
just plain WRONG.

>Section 9.5.3 of ISO15489.1 re vocabulary controls states that "
Classification systems and indexes MAY be supported by vocabulary >controls
that are >suited to the complexity of an organization".   Doesn't say
"should" ... just says "may". There is also no mention of >thesaurus in the
ISO15489.1 Standard.

>ISO15489.2 Guidelines / Technical Report provides but ONE methodology of
employing the ISO standard.  Here, Sections 4.2.3.1 and 4.2.3.2  >do refer
to the use of a thesaurus.  Also Section 4.3.4.2 also refers to vocabulary
controls and by extension a thesaurus.

>It takes a pretty big leap of faith to get to ...  "BCS + a controlled
vocabulary" are necessary for an organization to meet the ISO 15489
standard.

Jim, you raise some good points.

I did not ever claim to be PERFECT.

A person with strongly held opinions, possibly, but PERFECT never. So let's
take a look at the points Jim raises.

I must say that Jim is totally correct in what you address and that ISO15489
does say MAY in its wording plus COULD and other less than obligatory
wording e.g. SHOULD. One must remember that ISO15489.1 &.2 are CONSENSUS
documents and I have always felt the documents could have used some more
directive wording e.g. WILL and MUST.

I continue to praise ISO15489 to the heavens but again it is not PERFECT and
thus the current ongoing input to update and improve the Standard by
volunteers around the world.

It has always been my opinion that the original version of ISO15489.1  & .2
should have utilised some wording in a more directive manner with the use of
MUST, SHOULD and or WILL or probably the most appropriate would have been
something along the line of -

To be able to meet or attain the highest or maximum level of efficiency with
a RIM System it is desirable and possibly even mandatory that the following
procedure/s be implemented in an RIM system.

As stated by Jim, There is also no mention of thesaurus in the ISO15489.1
Standard.

My response is that the standard ISO15489.1 should mention A THESAURUS or
preferably a CONTROLLED VOCABULARY and this issue needs to be addressed.  My
belief is that if one does not have a CONTROLLED VOCABULARY then by
extension one cannot have a controlled BCS Business Classification Scheme.

As stated by Jim, ISO15489.2 Guidelines / Technical Report provides but ONE
methodology of employing the ISO standard.

Again, Jim is correct.

My response is that the implementation and use of  A THESAURUS or preferably
a CONTROLLED VOCABULARY is the PREFERRED option and not  only ONE option.
The Technical Report is where the meat of the Standard is and it was always
intended that a third level ISO15489.3 or specific Nation or Jurisdiction
Wide Workbook where each Country or Jurisdiction set its specific local
needs and levels of compliance.

As stated by Jim, >It takes a pretty big leap of faith to get to ...  "BCS +
a controlled vocabulary" are necessary for an organization to meet the ISO
15489 standard.

My response is that the ISO15489.1 and .2 are MINIMUM not maximum
requirements.

My position is to always were practicable to be the most efficient operation
in RIM and not just to meet the minimum levels set or expounded as
desirable.

To others on the List, Jim and I know each other and I enjoyed Jim's
presentations and level of expertise at the ARMA Conference in Long Beach.

Jim, it is great to be able to discuss these important RIM issues in this
fantastic forum of the American RM Listserv.

Let's continue this discussion and we can put it to bed in September with a
face to face get together in Chicago.

Happy Business Classifying, Laurie

Mr Daniel Lawrance [Laurie] Varendorff, ARMA
 <http://www.congresswest.com.au/records/index.html>
http://www.congresswest.com.au/records/index.html
Member of the Western Australian Government - State Records Commission (SRC)
- Digital Records Working Group (DRWG).
Specialist Technical Writer on Records and Information Management (RIM) and
related subjects, available for hire.
Published Articles available @ http://www.microfilm.net.au/articles.shtml
A Records Management Professional, and proud of the fact!
Consultant/Trainer/Tutor/Presenter: Records and Information Management
Imaging and Micrographic Specialist: 30 years experience
TVC -The Varendorff Consultancy also representing: Digital Microfilm
Equipment - DME
You may care to visit our web site @  Digital <http://www.microfilm.net.au/>
Microfilm Equipment (DME) - For all things Micrographic
Alternatively email us @  [log in to unmask]
Our URL is  www.microfilm.net.au <http://www.microfilm.net.au/>

The Varendorff Consultancy ABN: 77 836 801 165
PO Box 6497 East Perth, Western Australia 6892 - AUSTRALIA
PHONE: +61 [0]8 9291 6925 - MOBILE: +61 [0]417 094 147
EMAIL:            [log in to unmask]

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance