As you say, Elizabeth, the ORIGINAL COPY of a standard commercial
telephone directory might be considered a record, and archives and
historical societies certainly have need for keeping telephone
directories, but the run-of-the-mill organisation, public-sector or
private, does not, and would not consider a standard commercial
telephone directory a record.
Nor should they, or else we'll end up "keeping everything."
I, for example, have a copy of New York City's "Green Book" directory
(now bound in orange covers), but it is not a record for me (however, it
is for the Municipal Archives and also the City Hall Library).
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: Thursday, November 29, 2007 13:15
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] RM vs. IM
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]
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]
|
