Thanks, guys, for the responses - you've actually changed my mind on some
of this in a very succinct way.

Regarding the EDMS/ERMS interface, in my opinion the record copy concept
still applies - it is the most complete version, regardless of whether it
has been declared as a "record" or not.

Regarding dynamic databases, I would have responded that perhaps this is
IT's responsibility. However, lately we have been doing a lot of work with
IT on identifying and disposing of legacy databases. Out of that has come a
realization that they really don't understand the content of the databases
they are managing, or even its provenance - its just data. I can see
Records Management systematically incorporating such content information
into a records and disposition schedule for discovery purposes,  as the
content information has to reside somewhere. I can even see IT benefiting
from a customer relations standpoint, and a cost standpoint: regardless of
whether discovery/litigation is the principle motivator (in our
environment, it generally is not), it is expensive to rebuild databases
that have been deleted due to "low activity".

-- 
Dwight Wallis, CRM
Multnomah County Records Management Program
1620 SE 190th Avenue
Portland, OR 97233
ph: (503)988-3741
fax: (503)988-3754
[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]