RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Sender:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
"A.S.E. Fairfax" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 29 Nov 2007 10:14:53 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (76 lines)
Hi Fred.

In fact, it would and does qualify as a record.  Many organizations and
certainly government regard phone books as archival records.  Many archival
records as you know have informational value that has nothing to do with the
reason the record was created in the first place.  Phone books/directories
are happily preserved by many historical and genealogical societies, and
many archives.  They provide the historical researcher with a snapshot of
society at a given point in time for a discrete area, and tell us much about
population distribution, provide social evidence of other phenomena, and
clues to further research.

Here in Washington, the phone books created and issued by government are
indeed official public records in whatever form they appear or are
published. 

A company archivist would rightly consider the original issue of each run of
publications archival, while a publication is not in its multiple copies.
The first specimen however,  is. It is the record copy.

Elizabeth Fairfax, MA, CA
Island County Records and Information Services

-----Original Message-----
From: Grevin, Fred [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 9:52 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] RM vs. IM

Elizabeth, what about a telephone directory (paper or electronic)? It
qualifies as "information", but probably wouldn't qualify--in most
organisations--as a record.

Fred
===================================================================
Frederic J. Grevin
Email: [log in to unmask]
Phone: 212.788.8615
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of A.S.E. Fairfax
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 11:37
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] RM vs. IM

Hi Brianne,

In some cases it could be purely perceptual, and in others, the answer
may
depend on how your organization defines the word "record" or
"information".
I work for government, and our definitions are regulated as part of the
state code.  There is no difference between the two, except in the
techniques used to manage them to achieve a specific outcome or
longevity.
Recorded information, here, in whatever format, is a record.  The
management
of it is dependent on the context and content.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth Fairfax


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]

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